Mr. Speaker, there were a couple of questions in that.
First, on the effectiveness of committees. Committees really have very little impact on what happens in this place. The work actually done has almost no impact on what the government does. From that point of view, committees are virtually useless, quite frankly.
From the point of view of learning about an area, committees can be very helpful. That is the thing. Through my work on the defence committee for years and on other committees, as the immigration critic on the immigration committee and as the agriculture critic on the agriculture committee, I learned an awful lot about those areas. There is that benefit.
In terms of committees being enough that is nonsense. First, reports from committees are ignored by the government on a routine basis. We can point to a handful of committees that have had any impact that would really be noticeable at all.
If we are to limit debate to those committees, the few people involved will come to understand the issue better, but there will be no impact on government. What is the point?
If there is a debate in the House, then all members of can be involved. Maybe there will be some impact on government. Rarely is there, but on occasion there may be.
We have the leadership of the current Prime Minister. Certainly the member knows that it is virtually an elected dictatorship in the way the House operates. Even within her caucus, she knows that it is a virtual dictatorship, an elected dictatorship. That is what separates us from others in the function. I have heard many Liberal MPs say the same thing and certainly many from opposition parties.
When we look at the process, a committee is not enough. It has to take place in the House as well.