I just want to reiterate what my colleague, Mr. Housefather, said.
I absolutely agree with Mr. Johns that in order to be able to speak at committee, you need to have the requisite headset. That's something that was decided upon and made clear with the ruling and the communication of the Speaker in the House. We need to make sure that we're all playing on a level playing field, that we are all abiding by the same rules.
As Mr. Johns pointed out, it's as much about an equal playing field as it is about protecting the health and safety of the interpreters and the workers of the House of Commons. Lord knows they put in incredible time doing this work. We often ask them to stay hours and hours after a meeting is scheduled to continue with debates. They have families they want to go home to. They have soccer practices and hockey practices they want to drive their kids to. There are dinners they want to prepare. There are also those times when they simply want to go home to recharge rather than stay for hours and hours after a meeting is supposed to be scheduled. The least we can do is to make sure that we abide by the rules and we incorporate practices that protect their health and safety and prioritize their health and safety first and foremost. So I completely agree with Mr. Johns' sentiments.
What we're talking about here is different. This isn't about the privilege of speaking at committee or speaking in the House of Commons. This is the sacrosanct privilege of voting. It is sacrosanct. This is the very foundation of what we do here. As Madam Vignola raised, when that sacrosanct privilege is violated, not only is it injurious to the democratic process, not only is it injurious to that member of Parliament, but it's also injurious to the tens of thousands of constituents that the member represents. It's not just the member's voice that is represented in that vote. It is the voice of tens of thousands of constituents who send us to these hallowed grounds to vote on their behalf. So when that happens, it's not something that we can take lightly. It's not something that we can simply sweep under the rug and move on. It's something that I think has to be addressed and acknowledged. Steps have to be taken to make sure that it never happens again.
Again, this is the very foundation, the very reason that we are here in Ottawa on Parliament Hill, to do the bidding of the people that we represent. I want to make it clear that we're not talking about the privilege to speak. We're talking about the privilege to represent the people who voted us here, who sent us to Ottawa, to cast votes on matters of importance to them. I think that's something that's worth protecting, and we have to raise that issue whenever that is violated.
In that case, Mr. Chair, what I would do is to move a motion to adjourn the debate.