Exactly. We specifically asked for that documentation to be given to you unredacted, so that you, a trusted lawyer of the House of Commons and Parliament, could determine what was and was not relevant and tell us whether the government was redacting the information because it was truly irrelevant or whether it was just covering up what it didn't want Canadians to see. Now we've learned that it covered it up, even from you, and asked you to trust that everything contained under this black ink was irrelevant and that you didn't need to see it.
That is exactly the opposite of what we asked the government to do and what the members on this committee agreed to do. Shame on all the Liberal members of this committee who specifically committed to this. Mr. Fraser specifically committed to me that the disclosure from the government would include, unredacted, the information it had previously claimed was irrelevant. That is not what happened, so the government members did not keep their word. Shame on them for deceiving Canadians and fellow parliamentarians.
Let me move on now to the subject of bringing in witnesses who refuse to co-operate.
To me your report says that the House of Commons possesses the right to confine individuals as a punishment for contempt. You go on to say that the House ordered the Sergeant-at-Arms to take individuals into custody on four occasions and ordered the imprisonment of others, so could the House of Commons have law enforcement authorities take the Kielburgers into custody and compel them to testify, if it so wished and if they refused? Is that an accurate reading of the report you gave me?