Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for appearing today, Minister.
It is very clear that you were threatened. It is very clear that what was done was totally unacceptable. I certainly would not want that to occur to me.
When the Speaker ruled, he invoked Speaker Lamoureux's ruling of 1973. It was a totally different world at that time. It doesn't invalidate anything—the ruling is his ruling, and I respect that—but it was a totally different world. I don't think Monsieur Lamoureux could have imagined the kind of world we live in today, where unfortunately ministers who present legislation can sometimes be criticized.
From a practical point of view, the question that I'm still trying to ask myself is what this committee is going to do. I perfectly understand your point of privilege and I would have done the same thing myself, but I'm scratching my head as to what we can do as a committee when one considers that the Anonymous threat that was made against you came through a YouTube video, which is available to anybody on this planet to make. Over and above an investigation by police authorities, which I think is the right thing to do in each case where it may occur, what is it that you are hoping, in practical terms, this committee will do so that in future this kind of thing is not going to occur?
We talked last week with the Clerk. A lot of the talk went into the subject of hacking into people's accounts and things like that, but really had nothing to do with your specific point of privilege, which was based on a YouTube video, which anybody create. The reality is this is going to happen again. It's going to happen to other ministers at different times in the future. What can we do, other than get the police onto it?