I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
An amendment by itself does not convey the will of the committee unless the motion it amends is also carried. The clerk can correct me on that, but that's my understanding. If we adjourn debate at this point, we have an amendment that's been carried, but we have nothing to attach it to. Therefore, the terms of the amendment would not be binding on the committee.
I appreciate that we want to have the subcommittee meeting to hash out some of the business matters, but to the very first point I made, it seems like the summons is also somewhat germane here. The witnesses have not proven to be co-operative in the absence of a summons. I do think that it behooves us to deal with the Conservative's main motion in order to get those witnesses queued up.
I also acknowledge that their list of witnesses in this summons is quite long. The amendment sets a limited number of meetings, so we might not hear from all of the witnesses who are summoned. Some of them might get a “thanks but no thanks” message from us.
I don't think we can move to a subcommittee at this point and adjourn debate. I'll leave it at that. That's my impression of where we need to go.