Madam Chair, for all our sakes, would it be possible for you or the clerk to explain the situation? Are there any rules or procedures around this situation? Is there some ambiguity here? I understand that attempts are currently being made to find accommodations and reach a decision.
A small group of individuals in the room were able to identify the person, who was appearing anonymously. Again, as I mentioned earlier, I respect that—whether it was for security reasons or other reasons unknown to me.
My colleague Mr. Noormohamed seems to have information that I do not possess. I appreciate him sharing that information with the committee. Will that ensure the full credibility of this testimony? I doubt it. That's why I insisted on this point. Once again, the committee's credibility is at stake.
We committee members were able to identify the person. However, the public—that is to say the vast majority of people listening to us—will not have the same experience. The public will not know how we managed to identify this person through the camera lens.
That's what I'm concerned about today. I fear that some kind of precedent may be set. I also understand that there seems to be some procedural ambiguity and that accommodations are being made on a case-by-case basis in an attempt to clarify matters.
I am trying to determine whether or not we can retain the testimony or whether it will be possible to postpone it. If other witnesses return before the committee in the future, how should we proceed?
Personally, I would like us to take a moment to discuss this situation so that we can move on, either during committee business or at a meeting of the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure.
Thank you.