Mr. Speaker, I delivered to the Table last evening a letter requesting the opportunity to raise this question of privilege during this period of the House sitting today.
The allegation I am bringing forward is that the chair of the Subcommittee on the Review of the Anti-terrorism Act, a subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, released to the media, specifically to the National Post and reporter Andrew Mayeda, the substantial contents of the interim report of that subcommittee.
That interim report has been dealt with and reported out of the subcommittee. Mr. Speaker, I am trying to be very careful because I do not want to breach the confidentiality that the chair of this committee did. I believe it is simply appropriate for me to say that it has been reported out of the subcommittee and has been dealt with at the full committee. It is awaiting delivery to the House, which is expected shortly.
But in the interim, the chair took it upon himself to release to the media basically the contents of it, the principal recommendations in particular, as already mentioned.
Mr. Speaker, if you wish, you can look at yesterday's Quorum at page 10, where that article is reproduced. It was also on the front page of the National Post yesterday morning.
It is quite clear from the history of Parliament, this House of Commons, for quite some time that the breach of confidentiality is a breach of my privilege and that of every member of the House. It is a breach because it allows certain members of the House to have information in advance of the balance. That is the reason for the rule.
I want to draw to your attention, Mr. Speaker, the comments in Marleau and Montpetit at page 884. At the very bottom of the full text in the last full paragraph, it is stated:
Committee reports must be presented to the House before they can be released to the public. The majority of committee reports are discussed and adopted at in camera meetings.
That is what occurred on this occasion.
Marleau and Montpetit go on to say:
Even when a report is adopted in public session, the report itself is considered confidential until it has actually been presented in the House. In addition, where a committee report has been considered and approved during in camera committee meetings, any disclosure--
I highlight “any disclosure”.
--of the contents of a report prior to presentation, either by Members or non-Members, may be judged a breach of privilege.
Marleau and Montpetit go on to emphasize the seriousness of this conduct on page 885 and state:
It is not in order for Members to allude to committee proceedings or evidence in the House until the committee has presented its report to the House. This restriction applies both to references made by Members in debate and during Oral Question Period.
We cannot even talk about the interim reports at that stage.
Based on that information, it is quite clear that there has been a breach of confidentiality and the privilege of the House.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I would refer you to a ruling by Speaker Parent in the 2000-04 Parliament. The facts of the situation were similar to what you heard earlier today in another matter of privilege. It was raised, successfully, by the member for Provencher, who is now our justice minister. That was a situation where, again, the government of the day had given information to the media. The media released that information prior to the bill--this was a bill rather than a report--coming into the House. Speaker Parent found at that time that this was a clear breach of members' privilege and it was dealt with by referring it.
I want to make one additional point with regard to the conduct. Again, I am trying to be very careful not to breach the confidentiality as the chair of the subcommittee did. The report, which I have in my hand right now, is 25 pages long. At the top of every one of those pages is the word “confidential”. Every single page has it.
There is no ability on the part of that member, the chair, to claim any lack of knowledge of the importance and the significance of maintaining the confidentiality and following the rules of the House.
Let me cover one last point. Then I will conclude. One can ask if we are just being technical here, if this is a technicality. It is not. If we are going to function properly in the House, if we are going to be able to do our jobs as MPs, we have to be treated equitably. Every member has the right to have access to the information that is in that report.
I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that I was approached repeatedly by media about this interim report. I spoke to the member of the Bloc who sits on the committee. He also was approached. We knew we were not to release it in spite of the pressure put on us, because we respect, and rightfully so, the right of every member in the House to have that information at the same time. That time is when it is tabled in the House.
Mr. Speaker, if you rule in my favour that our privilege has been breached, I am in a position to present the motion as to how it should be referred and dealt with.