Thank you, Mr. Julian.
I think we're on the same point here, but the difference is with regard to notice of a motion, getting it on the table—getting that accepted by the committee—or debating the substance of the motion at length, which could take forever.
One of the problems, which we have had only very rarely in this committee, is being in the middle of something—for example, we have witnesses waiting to appear—and someone at the beginning of the meeting raising a notice of motion; debate ensues, and it's an hour and a half later.
This was only a suggestion that, as a courtesy to witnesses—and that's why we're having a debate—we defer these to the end of the meeting. We hear the witnesses, and if we want to carry on, then I guess we carry on at the subsequent meeting, but at least we have an opportunity to tell witnesses that they might be a little late at the next meeting. I think that's the intent here. It's not to limit anyone's ability to raise motions. It's just that they have, in the past, inconvenienced witnesses who came from some distance, when they have been raised at the beginning of the meeting.
I don't think any motion ought to take more than 15 minutes to debate anyway, and it's all about notice for a subsequent meeting rather than the meeting in progress, in any event. it's just a notice of motion to bring it to a meeting.
This is just for clarification. So that everybody understands where we're going here, that's what it's about.
Mr. Keddy.