Madam Chair, the committee can invite who they want. They can invite the janitor. We would probably get better answers than we got last week from the minister. There is no doubt about that. The fact that we can summon the officials, if they don't come, is proof that we can invite them. There is no doubt about that.
I've been here 13 years tomorrow—as well as Mr. Mark—and never, never had officials refuse to come to a committee, never. They wouldn't have dared. Everything that was read has nothing to do with what we're talking about here.
I take serious offence to Marie-Claude Tremblay, chief of parliamentary affairs, who is telling this committee: “The 2006-07 Main Estimates will be the subject of rigorous review at that time”--it's not up to her to decide that--“and all MPs will have the opportunity”--it's not up to her to decide that--“to join in the debate. MPs will therefore be able to discuss these issues with the Minister on two separate occasions.... I am sure they will use these opportunities to good effect and that the dialogue will be productive.”
I don't need an employee of the government telling this committee how to do our job, and I think this is insubordination. If I were chair of this committee, she would be invited to account for these remarks.
Now, the way it works, the committee invites the bureaucrats. For the first time that any of us know of, they refused. The committee summons. They refuse again, then the House deals with it. That's the way it works. We can call anybody we want. We can do anything we want, and the Speaker of the House will rule that the committee is master of its own affairs. That is the history of committee work on the Hill. Everything that was read has nothing to do with what we're doing here.
I think we should call the question very soon.