Thank you very much.
I had hoped that perhaps there could have been some consultations and agreements found around the room. Since we're back to this discussion at this time in the meeting, I do feel compelled to indulge my friend from the Liberal side on what our powers are as a committee. I think it's important that we recognize that indeed there is a precedent, and it's not just for the powers of our committee. I'm actually concerned about the precedent in which indulging this type of dismissal from attending to our committees might present to future people who want to seek to elude accountability to the Canadian public, and ultimately to our committee.
I would say this to the benefit of those who may not be familiar with our House of Commons Procedure and Practice under Bosc and Gagnon. If you look at chapter 20 in “Committees”, there is a specific reference to “Committee Powers”. In that section there is a subsection that specifically covers “To Send for Persons”. You can reference that online.
For the people who are watching the committee and are interested in what Parliament has the power to do, I would send them to this section, “To Send for Persons”.
I will, for the indulgence of this committee, just reference that:
Standing committees often need the collaboration, expertise and knowledge of a variety of individuals to assist them in their studies and investigations. Usually these [people] appear willingly before committees when invited to do so. But situations may arise where an individual does not agree to appear and give evidence. If the committee considers that this evidence is essential to its study, it has the power to summon such a person to appear.
In that opening paragraph under “Committees”, subsection “Committee Powers”, under the heading “To Send for Persons”, there's footnote 151. It says:
This power, delegated to standing committees by the House, is part of the privileges, rights and immunities which the House of Commons inherited when it was created. They were considered essential to its functions as a legislative body, so that it could investigate, debate and legislate, and are constitutional in origin.
This notion that we don't have the ability to do this I think undermines our power and would potentially set a dangerous precedent. I know that we've had many examples. I've had my staff messaging me at times when this had occurred, referencing back to the WE scandal and previous parliaments when we were trying to provide this type of oversight.
There are multiple paragraphs to the effect of which I've just quoted out of the Bosc and Gagnon. I would encourage all committee members to get themselves a copy and, in a very non-partisan way, uphold and protect the privileges that we have as committees.
If we're going to start making appearance before our committees optional—and I can assure you not just this committee—I could think about the impacts this would have on ethics and on many other committees. People who are inside the physical boundaries of this country are inherently under the constitutional powers that we have here to send for them. This doesn't just limit it to actually having them come and appear before the House.
We also have an unlimited ability, as set out in the Standing Orders, to send for papers and records. This is a government—unfortunately a Liberal government—that, in my opinion, has been negligent in this kind of “open by default” rhetoric that they use, where they also refuse, in many instances, to provide basic records that would provide accountability to the Canadian public, and indeed to our Parliament.
For those who are perhaps unfamiliar with the principles that New Democrats hold on this, know that we will be supporting, I would suggest, not just the ability to send for people, but also for papers and records as they relate to this. It is an important aspect, and one that is deeply protected by constitutional precedence going back to the founding principles, laws and governing orders of this House of Commons.
I'll spare you the other six paragraphs related to that section. I would call on not just our clerk but members of this committee to refer to Bosc and Gagnon, should they ever have any questions about what kinds of powers they have here at committee.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.