I think the guidance that needs to be followed or directed here is.... What this recommendation says is, “...a virtual presence of 20 members meeting the requirements of quorum as set out in Section 48 of the Constitution Act of 1867”. Section 48 of the Constitution Act of 1867 says right now: “The presence of at least twenty members of the House of Commons shall be necessary to constitute a meeting of the House for the exercise of its powers....” It doesn't say “the virtual presence”. It says “the presence”.
Going back to what I said earlier, this.... I get it, Mr. Turnbull. We've had four people come in and talk about this, and I didn't get a sense from them that everybody was in agreement. I understand the living tree argument. I understand that Parliament is the master of its own domain and the seat of Parliament is in Ottawa. Those things are very clear to me, from what I heard, but what I need to better understand, and I think what we all need to better understand, is just how a virtual presence can meet the needs of section 48 of the Constitution Act. I don't think we, quite frankly, heard that consistently.
The hybrid model that we're effectively using now on Wednesdays, at least for the purposes of the committee, is very similar to the hybrid model Mr. Richards spoke of earlier. I would strongly encourage that this recommendation is beyond the scope of the mandate of this committee, which is to look at the current situation of COVID-19 and to make recommendations to Parliament given the circumstances we are in today.
This fundamentally changes the way Parliament is to be going forward. I understand that we're talking about extraordinary circumstances going forward. I think we have to be very, very careful on this one. We are heading down a very slippery slope as it relates to the Constitution of this country and the fact that we are to sit in Ottawa. A physical presence means just that.
That's all I have to say, Madam Chair. I find it kind of curious that there's talk here about striking the quote of Mr. Dufresne up top, and perhaps moving it into the body. I don't recommend that we deal with this at all, and this is why my motion stands. The fact that this quote is somehow being administered to change the Constitution to reflect a virtual presence is curious to me, to say the least. I think we need to strike this and I hope members see that as well.
Thank you.