We're trying to get to the bottom of it, and it raises serious questions of credibility and prudent administration.
Madame DeBellefeuille did a very good job on that before. Was the hiring of this person appropriate? And if you look at the jurisprudence from the Commonwealth countries that follow the Westminster models, as we do, you will understand that this is relevant to the privilege issue that's on the table before us.
Now if you want to sandbag that and stop me from asking those questions, I will not be able to talk over you. I'm going to have to listen to you. But I am trying to make you understand that it is clear to me that these issues go to a question of credibility, they go straight to the question of the administration of that office, and it plays right into whether or not Mr. Ullyatt was following instructions on this or any other issue. And I put it to you that it's relevant for the work of this committee.
I also put it to you that under the procedure and House affairs definition, when we talk about
[...] and report to the Speaker as well as the Board of Internal Economy, on the administration of the House and the provision of services and facilities to Members—
we're right in that subject as well.
So I don't see how, as chair of this committee, you can say that those questions are off simply because it's being looked at elsewhere. They might be looking at the same fact set elsewhere for a completely different purpose. I want to look at that fact set here on a question of credibility.