Mr. Chairman, we could share. I'm sorry, I thought you were going around asking all the whips, so I was sitting here assuming my turn would come.
In the main, I would echo all of Mr. Hill's sentiments. I believe the tools are there. I think the Speaker was quite clear about the fact that he does have the necessary authority. Then what we need to do is police ourselves; I agree with Jay. I'm sure each whip here takes people aside when the behaviour that continues day after day. Some people have a bad day; some people get a little rowdy. Wednesdays seem to be particularly raucous in the House. I think we've all come to recognize that.
There are rules in place. There are points of privilege when people go over lines and when they use language they shouldn't. I think all of those rules need to be in place and I think are in place.
The recommendations, as well-intended as Monsieur Godin's recommendations are, in a lot of ways could have the opposite effect, because then the Speaker is looking at a very extreme ramification of what is currently an understood and acceptable practice. Ignoring somebody who was submitted on a Speaker's list from asking a question, from being recognized in the House, is probably the ultimate hobbling of a member of Parliament.
To actually throw us out of the precinct, that's a very tough ramification. Were I the Speaker, I would think, gee, do I want to go down this road? So in some ways it could have the opposite effect.
I don't think we need weekly meetings. I well recall, as I'm sure we all do, that from time to time the Speaker has hauled us up on the rug collectively and said, you have to improve the decorum.
The eyes of the media are also upon us, and I think that contributes to a bit of moral suasion for us to be better behaved. I can't have everybody who needs adult supervision sitting right next to me in the House, but we try to keep them within yelling distance.