Mr. Chairman, I would like to express my opinion on the need to have a fourth person in order to obtain a reduced quorum. I am thinking about circumstances where, for instance, the committee may be called upon to travel immediately to a very remote region in order to listen to some individuals' concerns. We have to consider the means available to the committee. The obligation to have this fourth person in order to have a reduced quorum and thus be able to hold a committee meeting represents an additional cost.
Moreover, unless Mr. Allen is prepared to split his amendment, I'm wondering whether we should accept it as it is worded, namely, whereby the quorum has to include an additional member as well as an opposition member and a member from the government. I would not like to see the situation, as we have already seen in certain committees, where the party in government, or for that matter a party from the opposition, uses this requirement in order to prevent certain witnesses from appearing. I am really counting on the good faith of the two parties, given the agreement that we have had up until now, in order to ensure that this committee continues to run smoothly. An aspect of a motion should not be used in order to prevent the committee from sitting.