This is what I'm getting to. I understand your desire for us to keep on track, but these are all very much related. It's the cause and effect. When you create laws, you create unintended consequences. My colleague Mr. Del Mastro wants to change the channel on the Conservatives, going back to the old fight with the Liberals. But he has opened a Pandora's box, and our committee is going to have to deal with this. We're going to have to deal with it in a judicious manner.
The second element of the Speaker's ruling had to do with the anonymous video, which was quite rightly moved to the procedure and House affairs committee. Using threats to influence members of Parliament to change their votes is more than breach of our privilege—it goes back to the founding of the parliamentary system.
King Charles lost his head over this. Whether we're in a digital age or whether it was 300 years ago, when the Sergeant-at-Arms had to keep the sword at the door for the Commons, you cannot threaten members of Parliament and tell them they have to change their votes or they have to stop a bill. That's a serious breach. We all agree on that. The breach was that they were going to air the dirty laundry of the minister and his ugly divorce. That's a threat that, quite rightly, went to the procedure and House affairs committee.
Now, the third element, and this is where we're going to get into the issues of House resources, was on this—