Mr. Chair, I listened to Mr. Gourde, and I am ready to move a subamendment specifying that it would be a staff person who had attended the in camera meeting.
I have no choice but to disagree with Ms. St-Denis's comment that if we authorize that person to consult the transcript of the in camera meeting, he or she could then tell people about it. That would not happen. Staff members have responsibilities and must respect Parliament's rules on in camera proceedings.
A staff person who attended the meeting has already heard it all. It's the transcript of what was said. They won't see anything new, just what was said while they were present at the in camera meeting.
All I am saying is that we need to help parliamentarians do their job. If a committee member doesn't want someone on their staff to hear what the committee discusses in camera, then the member should not invite them. If the member doesn't trust their staff, the member doesn't have to invite them to the in camera meeting. I can assure you that my staff members know what an in camera meeting means. I am the one responsible for keeping what is said in camera confidential. If a leak comes from my office, the staff member isn't the person responsible. I am entirely responsible for maintaining that confidentiality. I have never seen someone on a member's staff being called before the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. The member is the one who broke the in camera rules, so the member is the one accountable to the committee.
This amendment merely seeks to help members. I agree with Mr. Gourde's argument. If we let just anybody consult the transcript, we won't even know who was present at the meetings and who wasn't. I agree with the idea of moving a subamendment to rectify that. I repeat, this is strictly to help members. The people on our staffs aren't constantly changing. If the same staff person can't consult the transcript, the member will do it.
Am I allowed to propose a subamendment, Mr. Chair, since I'm the one who put forward the amendment in the first place?