I don't know that we're trying to say—at least I'm not—that all protocols be set in stone and this is just the way it is. My thought is that it's more of a guideline. This is how it has been done in the past and these are perhaps the elements that you should strongly consider.
For instance, when I was first elected it was written down. This is what your first day in the House was going to look like. This is what would happen on a throne speech. The Usher of the Black Rod would come in and pound on the door. You couldn't go past a certain spot in the Senate. It was all written down. The ceremony, it seems to me, has been the same since I was watching it on TV as a kid, and nobody strayed from that. But the ceremony is what it is and I have to assume that it's written down somewhere that's what happens—well, I know it is because I have it.
That's not to say our traditions won't change at some point and maybe the usher will do something different, but until that happens I just feel that sometimes it's nicer to be able to provide better resources. This might be our saying to the government, make it easier for others to get access to this type of information.
I'm going to ask you to stray in a little bit of a different direction because I have you here.
On half-masting the flag, for instance, I'm told on Parliament Hill, Canadian Heritage might say “This is the protocol to half-mast it”, but it's actually Public Works that has to order the flag down because they are in control of the building.
How much do we get in the way of protocol because the Parliament Buildings are controlled by Public Works and not by members of Parliament? Can you answer that? Or do we ever get in the way?