I would just like to add to what I have already said, Mr. Chairman. As I mentioned, I have no problem with the principle behind the broadcasting of our proceedings. On the contrary. I will simply point out that the guidelines that have been provided call for the committee to be given reasonable notice and that it is up to the committee to define that reasonable notice. Given that I personally knew about this only about 10 minutes before the meeting, I feel that the amount of notice was hardly reasonable.
I understand that exceptions are made if the agenda has been amended within 24 hours of the meeting, which is the case here, but the amendment was quite minor, in my opinion. That is my first point.
My second point is about the provision that prohibits cameras if the meeting is already being recorded by the House of Commons. I understand that this is not the case today, since we have decided not to use the equipment that is at our disposal, but perhaps the committee should give some thought to this and see whether it might not be better to use it in an environment that we know and control, rather than having outside cameras.
I will conclude, Mr. Chairman, by saying that we will consent to the presence in this case of an outside camera, which seems to be in compliance with the rules. However, I would like to go on the record has saying that I reserve the right, even though I don't really like that expression, or the opportunity to consult the documents, and, among other people, my whip in greater detail on this point and perhaps to come back to it.
To be clear, the fact that I have no objection to this practice being used today must not be perceived as consent on our part to take this as a precedent.