Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to Motion No. 142 in the name of the member for Scarborough-Rouge River. It states:
That this House unequivocally reconfirms the undoubted rights and privileges of the House of Commons, won from the crown and which became part of law many centuries ago, and in particular the unfettered right of the House and its committees to at all times compel the attendance of persons and require them to answer questions and to compel the production of such papers and documents as the House or committee considers necessary for the due carrying out of its mandate.
I listened carefully to the mover of the motion, a second term member of Parliament who has worked very diligently in a particular area of the House in which many members do not get to participate. It has to do with security, intelligence and review, et cetera.
The issue is important to the member because of the sensitivity and the importance of that area of responsibility in the House of Commons in terms of its mandate to create legislation and to ensure the laws of Canada are abided by.
The principal issue I want to deal with, rather than referring to some of the history, is whether or not the House of Commons should be a body that is prepared in advance for a problem or whether or not it is presently exposing itself to a situation where should there be a problem there would be some confusion.
The principal point raised by the member for Scarborough-Rouge River is a very good point: the House has not in its history dealt with the confusion or uncertainty of the powers of the House.
In my experience over the past three years as a member of Parliament dealing at the committee level, there have been times when I wondered whether or not there was an opportunity to bring to the committee forum additional information or expertise I knew was available but had not accepted an invitation of the committee to be there.
When I think of the important aspects that are dealt with by committees on behalf of the House, it raises a very important issue about whether or not committees have looked for opportunities to exercise this right which exists in law.
The fact that it has not been affirmed within our place and the fact that it has not been tested or applied here are all the more reason for the motion to have been brought before the House.
This is not a votable motion. At the end of the hour debate will cease. However it has raised the issue to a point where all hon. members will be looking for opportunities to test this right of Parliament.
As the member for Scarborough-Rouge River pointed out in his presentation, the Canadian House of Commons has never reaffirmed this right of Parliament and of its committees to call for persons or papers.
There has been a failure to articulate this right which leads to confusion. In the absence of a clear statement of authority, cabinet ministers and government officials may at some time be unaware. The powers of the committee must be more fully articulated.
Another issue raised was public confidence in Parliament. In terms of historical context, committee work in Parliament has not garnered public attention to any great extent.
The role of a member of Parliament is very broad. It is most unfortunate that many Canadians feel the performance of members of Parliament and the credibility of this place are more reflected in the activities during question period, which is only 45 minutes of each day even though the House starts at 10 in the morning and continues to 6.30 at night.
Committees operate in virtually every discipline. Members of all parties are represented on those committees. These facts are not well known to the Canadian public. It is unfortunate the Canadian public does not know what happens at committee. As a result or a consequence of Motion No. 142, possibly the role of committees can be reconsidered in light of the responsibilities seconded to them by the Chamber.
I congratulate the hon. member for Scarborough-Rouge River for raising an important issue in terms of the fundamental aspects of the operation of the House of Commons of Canada, the important role committees play, and the potential for confusion or a problem down the road.
Should a matter of importance to all Canadians and to the laws of Canada arise which would tend to put the House in some difficulty
or jeopardy, it would reaffirm the right of Parliament and the right of the committees to call for persons or papers.
I thank the member for raising the motion. Possibly he would consider reintroducing it at an appropriate time to ensure that the House does not miss the opportunity to be prepared.