Yes, I'm just trying to reference it here now.
Here's the concern I have. You're talking about the law clerk's letter, and I agree that as committees and as members we have the power to investigate things that are substantive, that we feel are important to standing committees, but as standing committees, we're still governed by the House.
We have decided that we are masters of our own domain under procedure, but essentially we are created by the House and we are responsible to the House, and we need to make sure that we respect the rulings from the House. So we want to make sure that when we are questioning a witness, we are making sure that the rights they are granted under O'Brien and Bosc, as I stated earlier, on page 1,068.... As a public servant, he doesn't have to answer all questions put to him, especially if they affect the study and the inquiry that's being conducted by the Information Commissioner.
I would just ask that as questions are being asked, you consider that in terms of what you call admissible and inadmissible. I'm just asking you to use your--