Information & Ethics Committee on Nov. 27th, 2007

[Rob Walsh]

You may recall, Mr. Chairman, my answer to the member was that in parliamentary terms, the process he described is applicable. But this debate today, in view of these letters, is about the extra-parliamentary process, which may be as equally effective in bringing the results. But in parliamentary terms, the member is quite correct, from here the business goes from the committee to the House and the House takes care of it. It might issue a Speaker's warrant.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Mr. Walsh, what the committee did, it was authorized to do under the Standing Orders, and they have legal foundation?

[Rob Walsh]

That's correct.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

And the only impediment at this point would be for the Minister of Justice to amend his surrender order.

[Rob Walsh]

I don't know if I would call it an impediment, but there's that route by which the minister could facilitate this process, in my view.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Thank you.

We'll go to Madam Lavallée now, please.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

First, could you immediately table the letter that you received from the Minister of Justice, Mr. Nicholson, and that you read to us this morning, even though it has not yet been translated? I'd like you to file it immediately and to distribute it, then send us the translated version as soon as possible.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

You were asking to circulate what I have now and to provide the committee with a translated version as soon as we get it—

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Exactly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Is that okay with the committee?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

I will ask the clerk to arrange that immediately.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

I may need unanimous consent, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

It's unanimous. Absolutely.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you very much.

I'm going to explain, in somewhat simpler words and knowingly, what you've just explained. You said that, starting today, so that we could hear Mr. Schreiber's testimony on Thursday morning, the committee Chair must first ask the Speaker of the House to ask Mr. Schreiber to come and testify. Did I understand correctly? No.

Can you explain it without using the legal jargon, simply? What has to be done for Mr. Schreiber to come and testify here on Thursday morning and for him to stay here long enough to give his testimony? What steps must be taken, one after the other?

[Rob Walsh]

There are two options for doing that: either the minister takes action outside of Parliament, or the committee can table a report in the House saying that it needs an order from the House to ask Mr. Schreiber and the responsible persons concerned to attend a committee meeting on November 29. If the House of Commons agrees to issue that order, I imagine the Speaker of the House of Commons, Mr. Milliken, will sign a warrant to go to the detention centre in Toronto, which has the authority to ensure that Mr. Schreiber is here on Thursday morning.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

And the rest of the extraparliamentary procedures, as you said, will operate normally. If we do what you propose we do, there shouldn't be any problem in having Mr. Schreiber be here on Thursday morning to testify. Did I understand correctly?

[Rob Walsh]

In my opinion, since this is a political decision, the minister has the power to say no and to act on the order for extradition to Germany to which Mr. Schreiber is subject.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

If I understand correctly, you're telling me that the Minister of Justice—

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Madame Lavallée, order, please.

I have five more people who have indicated that they would like speak. We're almost halfway through our meeting, and we still have, I believe, four motions to deal with.

I'm in the hands of the committee. I can continue to receive questions on this from these five people, or we can move on to the motions. I think that everybody, other than Mr. Wallace, has had one question.

[An hon. member]

I have a question for you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Yes, that's where we are right now.

I'm going to suggest that I deal with the five people who are on the list right now, and then we will move to the motions. I'm pretty sure that the questions we're asking now and debating now actually will be relevant in the discussion of the motions.

I don't want to frustrate anybody, but I think we should move on, because you could talk about this for another hour. I want the committee to have the opportunity to make specific inquiries related to what I did. We are moving a little forward on what we should do, so as we slowly get there, I think we should move on.

I'm going to take Mr. Dhaliwal, Mr. Thibault, Mr. Martin, Mr. Hiebert, and Mr.Wallace, and then we will move on to the motions.

Is that acceptable?

[An hon. member]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Dhaliwal.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Through you to Mr. Walsh, are these summons from this committee paramount to the Extradition Act? You said that the provincial authorities have no say in these summons and that Mr. Nicholson has to make a political decision.

If Minister Nicholson does not make the decision this committee wants, do you think it is appropriate for us to go to the House of Commons to strengthen this committee's position on Mr. Schreiber's extradition before we finalize the whole report on this issue?