First of all, it is true that the justice committee has agreed to receive the transcripts and records offered by Ms. Wilson-Raybould in response to other witnesses before that committee, but the waiver has not been extended to allow her to respond to those still important issues that both she and Ms. Philpott say they wish to speak to.
Our motion says, in (B), that a formal request be made by our committee chair to write a letter to the Prime Minister and to request that he waive all constraints that would apply to any individuals the committee may decide to invite, whether it be Ms. Wilson-Raybould or Ms. Philpott primarily, or to others who, I believe, do have a right to respond to Ms. Wilson-Raybould's testimony, as well as to that of the Clerk and the former principal secretary.
Second, with regard to the AIQ investigation, I agree that this committee did not have the tools or the authority to demand completely honest responses from the executives of AIQ, and we stated such in our report. They were unwilling witnesses; there is no question about that. They had to be dragged, kicking and struggling, to come back before this committee to not answer questions that we still had.
I think certainly in the case of Ms. Wilson-Raybould and Ms. Philpott , we have willing witnesses who are anxious to present testimony. If, indeed, the justice committee reopens or accepts and releases the documents that Ms. Wilson-Raybould will table, sooner or later, there is a possibility—although I sense it's remote—that they would reopen their study to include a request to the Prime Minister to extend the waiver or to remove entirely all constraints on their testimony.
Third, with regard to the Ethics Commissioner's investigation, I think he has expressed in his appearances before us within the last year or the last half-year his concerns that he doesn't have the necessary authority to conduct investigations to the extent that he would like and that in fact not only his order-making powers but also the penalties that he may apply are rather modest.
While I appreciate your remarks with regard to agreement on the leak regarding the judicial appointment process, I would still urge you to support the motion before us today, with the understanding that it would not interfere or conflict with whatever remaining study the justice committee may wish to undertake. I am, however, not optimistic that, beyond the release of whatever Ms. Wilson-Raybould intends to send to them, it might be reopened, given some of the statements by the members of that committee when it was shut down.