I want to thank the hon. member for Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île-d'Orléans for his remarks on the point of order raised by the hon. member for Cariboo—Chilcotin, as well as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House for his contribution.
I have considered the matter and it seems to me there are two important issues here.
The first is whether or not members of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada can sit on the committees in this House. I believe it has been the practice that they can.
The hon. member for Davenport, for example, has been chair of a committee in this House for many years. He is a privy councillor. The hon. the parliamentary secretary pointed out that there are others in the House who are privy councillors and who can sit on committees.
The right hon. member for Calgary Centre could have sat on a committee had his party put him forward. Whether he in fact was on a committee during the last session of Parliament I am unaware, but he could have been and was entitled to do so because of the fact that he is a member of this House.
It is certainly the practice that ministers cannot sit, but the parliamentary secretaries who have been sworn of the Privy Council are not ministers of the Crown. They are sworn of the Privy Council. They may be able to attend cabinet meetings; I do not know. They may be able to have access to cabinet documents. That has been stated to be the reason for them being sworn of the Privy Council, at least to deal with certain matters in relation to the departments for which they work, but the Chair is unaware of any move to make them members of the cabinet. In fact, the opposite, as I believe to be the case, has been stated: they are parliamentary secretaries and have been sworn of the Privy Council.
In these circumstances, I believe it is not appropriate for the Chair to render a decision on such a matter, indicating that these individuals cannot sit on House of Commons committees. In my opinion, this is not a matter relating to procedure.
Obviously, this is causing serious debate, and it is quite possible that members of this House have different opinions on who may sit on which committee, particularly when three parliamentary secretaries are members of the same committee.
However, this matter could be subject to a debate. In fact, it could be raised during a debate either in committee or in the House at a later date. In my opinion, it does not concern House procedure.
As a result, I cannot interfere by making a ruling that would prevent these members from being named to this committee or to limit the term of their membership.
The House itself adopted the report of the striking committee determining who was sitting on this committee. How is it for the Chair to say that the decision of the House was somehow incorrect or wrong or improper when the House agreed, I believe unanimously, to the adoption of the striking committee report?
In the circumstances I am not in a position to interfere. I do not believe the Chair should be. If hon. members wish to continue the debate they can do so elsewhere, or by bringing the appropriate motion to the House at a later date, perhaps on an opposition day, not that I would ever make suggestions as to what items might be discussed on an opposition day, tempting as that might be.