I want to start by telling you, Mr. Hall, that it is a great pleasure to see you back before this committee. You really left your mark as a clerk. I had the opportunity to work with you. You are living proof that retirement has not dampened your intellect. You are still as sharp as ever.
My questions will be along the lines of those of Mr. Reid. You mentioned that you would support changing the Constitution in order to define the circumstances. Let us say we amend the Standing Orders in order to circumscribe the process. You wrote in an article, referring to an academic paper, that if there was a resolution from the House of Commons, this would be a part of the Governor General's consideration. Technically, that is fine. But the last time, the government prorogued on December 30. If we are not sitting, the prorogation procedure is different.
We will rise in June and let us say that after the break, in August, a rumour is going around and is picked up by reporters that the House will not come back on September 20 and that resumption has been delayed until October. How would we be able to meet? Or if the prorogation came into effect quickly and there was no longer a Parliament, how could we meet in order to pass a restrictive resolution or make any decision? We need to look very closely at any amendment to the Standing Orders as well as the feasibility of such an exercise.