Certainly. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
One of the issues is that the last line of this motion states “that any motion to sit in camera is debatable and amendable”. Specifically, you'll note that Standing Order 67(2) states that these are dilatory motions. They're not debatable motions. It's outlined in chapter 20, on page 1089, where it says, “Any member may move a motion to go from sitting in public to sitting in camera (and vice versa). The motion is decided immediately without debate or amendment.”
I do know that some committees have adopted this motion in a previous Parliament. I believe that they used it more as a guide rather than a strict contradiction of the Standing Orders in that way. We did discuss it at the beginning of 43-2 for foreign affairs. One of the issues that comes up as well with Mr. Morantz's concern about making the decisions public is that there could be some diplomatic concerns with doing that. For example, if the committee is deciding to conduct a study about a certain country, for example, and members vote against it, it is then captured in the minutes that members have voted against hearing about this specific issue; however, it's an in camera meeting, so you cannot defend your position publicly.
Those kinds of issues could potentially come up with specific regard to foreign affairs.