Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will return to where I left off, but I do want to respond to what was allegedly a point of order but was, I think, more intended as a point of debate from Mr. Angus. I don't want to miss the opportunity to underline how absurd, incorrect and even dangerous the implications of what Mr. Angus said are.
First of all, his implication was that we shouldn't take so seriously the desire of a member to speak at committee if, in his judgment, that member hasn't shown sufficient interest in the past in the subject. I think the implication that he made about the member for Peace River—Westlock is obviously completely inaccurate. The member for Peace River—Westlock speaks frequently about the energy sector, about jobs, about opportunity. Obviously, his constituency in particular is significantly impacted by these issues.
I know for Mr. Angus that it's not inevitable, just because someone represents a constituency where energy is important, that the member would actually speak about it. However, in the case of Mr. Viersen, that's actually true. He speaks often about the energy sector.
I hope he won't mind my sharing with the committee that he and I are actually housemates in Ottawa. There are times when I'm trying to sleep that he's pacing the halls, talking to himself about the importance of the energy sector and talking on the phone to constituents who are two hours behind, demonstrating his deep commitment to standing up for energy workers. It's certainly important to him and very important in his constituency.
As I've spoken about before and, I think, will develop a little bit later on, the issue of parliamentary privilege is not principally about the privilege of members as such. It's about the tools that members have, and need to be able to have, in order to play their appropriate representative functions.
The other thing that is deeply, deeply troubling about Mr. Angus's comments is the implication that somebody's privileges, particularly in the context of their ability to speak at committee, should somehow be contingent on their having demonstrated sufficient interest in the topic in the past.