Mr. Chair, I'll be brief, because I take my colleagues' comments to heart and under consideration.
The amendment that we're proposing does meet some of the tests that my colleagues across the way have set out. The process we have in place right now—the letters we've received from the deputy secretary to the cabinet, the quarterly letters we are receiving that detail the situations where a screen is applied, and the following up, in the course of those letters, with additional information as it is able to be disclosed about decisions that are being made in government at an appropriate time—is an exercise in transparency and accountability that I think we haven't seen before. This is a move in the right direction.
I am heartened that, during the parliamentary break, we received the latest of the letters from the deputy secretary to the cabinet detailing situations that have arisen since February, outlining details around two of those situations where those details can be made public at this time and noting, importantly, that there are additional situations still under consideration that are not yet public, on which we will presumably be provided with details in due course. The letter finishes by setting out that the next quarterly report will be given by August 15.
The process we've set out here is actually a good one for keeping this committee informed on an ongoing basis, and particularly with the portion of the amendment that requires the Privy Council Office to provide the committee, as necessary, any updates to the assessment process for applying the Prime Minister's conflict of interest screen. That was actually a nod to what my colleagues across the table are suggesting: that we ensure this committee is informed on a continual basis of the process, both through PCO and by requiring the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner to be invited to committee every quarter following one of these reports. It gives an opportunity for this committee to quite transparently consider some of the situations that committee members might be interested in.
I won't belabour this, but what we've come to here is actually a very good development in terms of the conversation we've been having on this for some time now—since last fall—about the process that's under way. There's a good rhythm and now a good sense of the time frames in which we can expect new information. We have a PCO that has been responsive in giving us information according to the schedule that we've set out to date.
This amendment goes one step further in suggesting that we can engage PCO as needed, that we are going to post reports publicly on the committee's website and that we are going to invite the commissioner as need be following these reports. This is a good development, and we'd like to see it move forward.