This is putting us all in a rather precarious position because there are matters of confidence within in camera discussions. We don't want to break those rules. We're not here to make public some of the issues that we have been advised of in camera or by legal teams that have also written to us with regard to these matters. In terms of some of the witnesses who are being called before us, without giving them the opportunity to provide.... How should I say this? Again, without breaking the integrity of the in camera discussions that we've had, we're not giving them the opportunity to actually to show us or validate the reasons why they're not able to attend. Then, of course, the RCMP may or may not be reviewing this case and looking for whatever criminality or admissibility that there may be.
Will we, then, as a result of doing some of what we're doing here...not be admissible thereafter? That concerns me, too.
Then we have an investigation under way, which we're trying to complete. We want to be able to use every opportunity that exists for the investigator to take appropriate action. Does this, then, preclude it or prejudice that outcome? Possibly.
I'm just worried about the public confidence that we're possibly compromising because there's certain information that the committee has been made aware of. There are certain advisements, recommendations and suggestions that have been given to us in camera. Now, the opposition members from the Conservative Party have taken it upon themselves to reach out to certain witnesses, have obtained matters of confidentiality before them and have divulged it thereafter in the questioning of other witnesses, compromising again the confidentiality matter and then being put on notice by those matters. Individuals have taken it upon themselves to go forward on things that will compromise, I believe, the integrity of the investigation that we're trying to get to the bottom of.
Even today, members of the committee have been told that there are certain witnesses who are going to be coming to see us this week. We don't know anything about it. However, somehow this information is being shared with the Conservative Party. Nobody else on the committee is being advised of that. That, in itself, is a problem.
This motion was obviously well prepared ahead of the activities today because it was taken upon discretion to proceed on something even before we had our in camera meeting today. Again, that's disturbing.
It is important, I think, that we take a pause and suspend this issue until we have greater understanding, even from the RCMP, in terms of the implications of what may be put forward here today. It's important for us to suspend because I know that people want to make possible amendments to this motion to provide greater understanding, clarity and protection for certain witnesses. They have that right. We should be providing them every opportunity to be protected while we, at the same time, protect the government and the committee members.
We have a duty to ensure that we get to the truth. We have a duty to ensure that we understand everything that's occurred. I would—