—on the amendment, the Board of Internal Economy is the place to discuss all of this use of Hill resources and parties have a great interest that it be done in the Board of Internal Economy, but you know what? We could do it in public.
Honestly, I have some very interesting things before me that could well be looked at. I hope that Robert Fife is listening, because he might find some interesting things here. We can certainly make them all public.
I think this is the first time you have heard me talk like this, because I'm usually the quiet, unassuming lady who tries to work within the rules and the mandates of the committees. However, in this case, I feel that this exercise exceeds the limits of the committee. Some of the members of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics here seem to think that they can use our committee as a forum to make all kinds of allegations and to summon citizens who are not even part of our political world. They are politically engaged citizens, and they have every right to engage in politics. In fact, we encourage them to do so. On the other hand, there seems to be a perception that this committee serves as a forum or a kind of star chamber, as they have in the United States. I don't think anyone wants to apply that model in Canada.
To put it simply, what could come out of that would be very interesting.
I will close with that. I think we're here precisely to defend parliamentary tradition and procedure and to uphold people's confidence in the political system. The proper place to study this matter is the Board of Internal Economy. If certain members prefer to do this in the public arena, then we will be opening a can of worms, won't we?
With all due respect to my colleagues, I think there are other ways to deal with this issue. That is what concerns us. My amendment outlines the way to do this.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.