Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, gentlemen, for coming this afternoon. We appreciate your insight on this difficult subject.
Mr. Denis, on the paragraphs that you just read with regard to the member's right to seek some type of remedy as it relates to a question of privilege or an attack on one's character, obviously we have the right now, through a number of provisions within our Standing Orders, to request that the Speaker rule on that. But in relation to paragraph 21, you outline that any process should be a confidential process. Obviously, there's a contradiction with what exists today and what we might desire in that there be a confidential process.
It seems to me that probably we're dealing with two different issues. One is an issue of harassment, the other is the issue of sexual harassment, and obviously there can be a blending of the two. I guess my question would be that if we could exclude issues of sexual harassment and deal only with issues of harassment in terms of.... Well, we don't know how we even would define that, I guess. Obviously, the House has provision.... Does the House have a provision to deal with an issue that is perceived harassment and relates to conduct that doesn't happen in the chamber, if it happens somewhere else in the precinct? What is the provision that the House has as oversight as it relates to something that's perceived as a harassment issue that would happen somewhere else in the precinct?