Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate to some extent what Mr. Vidal is trying to do here with respect to getting more information on the table on this study, but I have to say this. I've given this a lot of thought. At first I thought it wasn't a problem, but the more I thought about it, the more I thought about how inappropriate it is.
I'm a former chair, as you know, Mr. Chairman. When I look at procedure and I look at the integrity of committee—the key word is here “integrity”—I just think it's inappropriate. It's highly inappropriate. Let me dig a bit deeper into why.
This committee, when it brings out witnesses, has the ability—any committee has the ability—to further question or expand on the dialogue, as we did today, with any one of the witnesses giving that testimony, making sure of the credibility and ensuring the accountability of the comments being made. Otherwise, if we don't have that ability as members of this committee, or of any committee for that matter, in the House of Commons, then any testimony becomes arbitrary. Therefore, really, we don't need to have members come out. We can just simply ask them for a summary: Hand it in. The analysts would take it. Regardless of what we think in terms of trying to rebut with questions or trying to draw down and get more granular, the comments being brought forward to committee would simply be arbitrary.
Quite frankly, Mr. Chairman, that's just not right. That's not why we're here, as members of any committee. We are here to listen to testimony, to question testimony and to have dialogue with those who are providing testimony. That's the very purpose of committee. That's the very integrity of the committee and of the members who sit around this horseshoe when we bring out witnesses. Therefore, to ensure that through this dialogue, through this testimony that ultimately goes to the analysts, we therefore can participate in what we expect to come back from the minister with regard to the recommendations we bring forward.... Of course, there's the response from the department, vis-à-vis the minister, that they would bring, and then, of course, it's prepared to go to the House.
I just think it's highly inappropriate. It is a public document. It's sitting there. It can be referred to by anybody who can look at it, whether it's members of the committee or anybody else, for that matter. However, for it to be brought into this committee, once again, simply makes it arbitrary testimony.
Once again, Mr. Chairman, I feel that it is highly inappropriate.
Thank you.