No. In her case, she came in as a substitute member, so she had full rights. I'll just put it on the record that I was not happy about her participation. I do feel that as the parliamentary secretary to a minister who shares responsibilities on procurement of national defence assets, it is a conflict and is a violation of your own directive in the mandate letter. However, she was duly and officially substituted in and she was a member of the committee.
Evidence of meeting #26 for National Defence in the 42nd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.
A recording is available from Parliament.