Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary spent a lot of time talking about the solicitor-client privilege issue, which I concede and agree with him is a constitutionalized matter in our Constitution.
However, there is another constitutional convention. According to the late Marc Rosenberg of the Ontario Court of Appeal, it is the most important constitutional convention. He said, “Although the Attorney General is a cabinet minister, he or she acts independently of the cabinet in the exercise of the prosecution function.”
We have these two principles at stake, and the solicitor-client privilege to which he refers would appear to have nothing to do with whether or not the former attorney general was pressured to take a certain position, solicitor-client privilege being about the advice a lawyer gives to a client. It is a bit of a stretch, therefore, to understand whether it exists here or whether it has not been waived because of the Prime Minister's comments to the media.
In a contest between these two constitutional conventions, is the most important one not that Canadians be assured that our rule of law system exists and that there be no political interference with the exercise of prosecutorial discretion?