Daryl Kramp at the Public Safety and National Security Committee

I will read from the paragraph that applies to this, because it is open ball. It says:

There are no specific rules governing the nature of questions which may be put to witnesses appearing before committees, beyond the general requirement of relevance to the issue before the committee

Now, there is an issue of relevance, in that when the letter was directed to the committee, it was relevant to Bill C-44. It is relevant, so at this particular point, it would then be admissible and accepted, according to the paragraph that is in here.

So yes, it is in order.