Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I will be much briefer than 10 minutes, and then I'll be followed by Philippe Dufresne, the law clerk and parliamentary counsel, who will give an explanation of the constitutional issues that might be involved in holding a virtual House of Commons.
As I said, the law clerk and I are here to address the constitutional and legal implications of a sitting that includes the remote participation of members or that is entirely virtual.
Parliamentary privilege exists to enable Parliament to function effectively without undue impediment, and in Canada, it is enshrined in our Constitution. The rights and immunities associated with parliamentary privilege include control by the House of Parliament over its debates and proceedings in Parliament, including its day-to-day procedures.
The Constitution provides a number of requirements that the House must follow in determining how to regulate its debates and proceedings.
Relevant to this study is section 48 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which specifies that a quorum of 20 members is required in order to constitute a meeting of the House.
Section 48 states that the presence of at least 20 members of the House of Commons shall be necessary to constitute a meeting of the House for the exercise of its powers, and for that purpose the speaker shall be reckoned as a member.
As well, section 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867 and sections 17 and 18 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms mandate that—