This is the first time we've met this situation. We normally receive third party requests for information. In this particular case we are dealing with information that is covered by parliamentary privilege, but we often get third party requests for information, for example, somebody requesting information from a department. For example, there is a request that was made to the Department of Public Works relating to a situation, an event that touches on the House administration or the House of Commons itself, something related to the long-term planning program.
In this case, there are exceptions that are provided for in the act. Depending on the situation, the House will agree or not to the release of the documentation.
We've had a few issues in the past from four or five different departments, I'm told, and when we have raised the issue that the documents were protected by parliamentary privilege, that was accepted by the departments.
In the case of this request for these emails, the Auditor General did not accept the position that privilege applied to the documents. I am not speaking for them, but the way we were told they were interpreting the act is that there is nothing in the act providing for privilege as an exception for not releasing the documents. Therefore, they felt they had no choice but to say we don't have an exception in our act for privilege and therefore we will release the documents. We said that these documents, according to practice, are covered by privilege, and therefore we have to follow the provisions of the act.