Welcome to the 27th meeting of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. Today, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we have a study on the court challenges program.
Just before we take our witnesses' statements, I would just like to read one little thing about the way we're going to handle some of this:
As you are aware, some of the matters which we may be examining over the next couple of meetings are the subject of legal actions. As a result, I would like to take this opportunity, before we begin, to remind members of the sub judice convention, and to outline how I intend to deal with any issues that might come up.
As stated in the House of Commons Procedure and Practice on page 534, “The sub judice convention is first and foremost a voluntary restraint on the part of the House....” Members of Parliament may therefore decide to exercise a certain degree of restraint when considering matters that are before the courts. While members are free to go about their business freely and without interference, they are also reminded to take into consideration the role of the courts. Accordingly, members and the committee may choose not to do or say things that would prejudice any lawsuit.
Witnesses and members may discuss the various policy and program issues that are before us. We are not here to decide or pass our judgment on the merits of any legal action. Witnesses are not here to plead their legal case, nor are members here to try to bolster or undermine one side or the other in any litigation. If I believe that witnesses or we are straying into any lawsuits or legal matters, I will remind participants to return to the parliamentary arena.
If we all remember our purpose here, while recognizing the proper role of the courts, I am certain that I will not have to make any interventions.
I am not here to be an adjudicator, I hope, on those particular points.
Go ahead, Mr. Kotto.