This is the 46th meeting of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics. It has to do with the Conservative Party of Canada's activities during the 2006 election in relation to certain election campaign expenses, and the ethical standards of public office-holders as a consequence.
Colleagues, as you know, the committee submitted a list of 79 witnesses. I want to first report to the committee that the clerk's office did an excellent job in making all attempts to contact these proposed witnesses. The chair had no direct contact with any witness at any time, other than Mr. Mayrand, whom you know I spoke to in our last meeting, and Mr. Saunders, the public prosecutor, who contacted me with regard to questions about their appearance.
I'm not going to give a full report on the 79 witnesses, but I can indicate that a very large number of them gave valid or compassionate reasons for not being available to appear before us during these four days of hearings.
I also will indicate that on July 31 I did in fact issue summonses for 31 persons. These summonses were issued because there was no response to our invitation to appear, or they declined to appear, or they would not confirm their attendance on the day. Those who responded, as I indicated, with valid or compassionate reasons were not summonsed.
I want to also indicate to members that I have received an opinion from the law clerk of the House of Commons in regard to the sub judice convention. As you know, it is a voluntary convention. It basically is a statement that a witness will not be able to answer a question because it involves another proceeding in which they are a party. However, in regard to our hearings, since Mr. Mayrand's situation was specific, the law clerk has indicated that the sub judice convention is not--and I repeat, not--a valid reason for not answering a question. Mr. Mayrand did invoke that privilege as it was agreed upon as a condition of his appearing as a witness, as you know.
Finally, with regard to general process, this morning we have six witnesses on the orders of the day. On Friday, one witness wrote to the clerk advising that this was the only day they would be available, but that did not happen until after summonses had been issued and the notices of meetings with the witness schedule had been put in place. This morning we do have five of the six witnesses, I believe, who have appeared. This is a two-hour session. It's going to take the two hours to deal with them. However, the witness who wrote to the clerk, which I found out about on Friday, has appeared this morning. That is Mr. Doug Finley. As you know, he's the campaign manager of the Conservative Party of Canada's campaign.
I responded on Friday to Mr. Finley that we did not have time this morning to hear him. He was scheduled to appear on Wednesday. I also offered, because of our light schedule on Thursday, that this would be another opportunity for him to appear. At this time I'm proposing to move forward with the actual scheduled witnesses, and should there be time at the end, we will deal with Mr. Finley, if that's acceptable to the committee.
Finally, with regard to—
