The Extradition Act doesn't take into account—as most statutes don't—what legal powers might be exercised by the House of Commons or its committees vis-à-vis the powers discussed under the statute. It's just not dealt with. So in that sense you're bringing into play considerations that simply aren't contemplated by the Extradition Act, and that's not unusual.
I think I'm answering your question in saying that an order of the House has the standing legally of an order of the Superior Court. Officials have to respect an order of the House much as they would respect an order of the court.
By that process, what you'd be doing is you would be serving a legal document on the superintendent of the Toronto West Detention Centre. In our view, he'd be obliged to respect it, notwithstanding the fact that he has an order of surrender from the minister directing him to hold the person in custody until the surrender is executed.
Nonetheless, in the face of this order, in my view, he or she would be obliged to respect that order of the House, deliver the person here, and perhaps maintain custody up to the doors of the precincts. He would then hand the individual over to the Sergeant-at-Arms to provide to the committee. After the committee was finished that day, he would return him to the custody of the superintendent, return him to the custody of the provincial authorities, and perhaps bring him back on an another occasion, if the committee wanted him on a second occasion. It depends on the terms of the order.