It is 3:30, so at this point in time I will call the meeting to order.
Bienvenue à tous.
The first item we're going to deal with, colleagues, is the minutes of the steering committee that was held on Tuesday of this week. Those minutes, which have been circulated, basically set out the steering committee's recommendations for future business.
Proposed for today is that we debate Mr. Siksay's motion. The next three days, which would be Tuesday, October 19, Thursday, October 21, and Tuesday, October 26, we're going to call some of the commissioners. We don't have the specific dates because we have to respect their schedules, but it will be the Commissioner of Lobbying, the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, and the Privacy Commissioner, who have all tabled annual reports in the last three months.
Those are the basics of the minutes of the steering committee.
The chair would entertain a motion for their approval.
So moved by Ms. Davidson.
Is there any discussion?
All in favour? Any contrary minded?
(Motion agreed to)
The final item, colleagues, is Mr. Siksay's motion. He tabled it for notice at the last meeting of this committee.
I'd like to make a few opening comments on the motion, the gist of which is to report certain matters to the House. The motion is lengthy, and it has a number of appendices attached, but when you boil it down, it really concerns the right of parliamentary committees to call before them exempt political staff of ministers and the Prime Minister himself.
I believe the gist of the government's position is laid out in the letters of Minister Baird and Minister Ambrose to the committee. We also have--and we've circulated and tabled before this committee--the legal opinion that we asked for and received from the parliamentary legal counsel.
I have a couple comments. I'm not going to invoke closure or anything, but it probably is a motion that doesn't deserve two hours of debate. I don't think we have to get into all the facts, as I think those have been canvassed by the committee previously. I would ask that you not confuse the ability of the committee to call witnesses with questions that could be put to a witness that might be ruled out of order, for instance, those involving cabinet confidences or things of that nature.
The issue before the committee is whether this is a matter that ought to be referred to the House. Is it of a significant nature? Can it be handled by other means? It all boils down to whether it's in the public interest and the interest of Parliament to refer this matter to the House.
As everyone here knows, the committee has no jurisdiction to order the attendance of the witness or to sanction or to punish any witness who does not appear. These are matters that have to be adjudicated by the House, acting as an assembly.
With those opening comments, I'm now going to invite the mover of the motion, Mr. Siksay, to speak to his motion. We will have a list after that.
Mr. Siksay, the floor is yours.