Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Lethbridge for her contributions today.
I will just point out a couple of clarifications before my question. The first is that as an exception, for only the fourth time in history since 1987, cabinet confidence was waived and the absolutely unprecedented solicitor-client privilege was waived to allow the former attorney general to speak. That is the first point.
Second, when she spoke, she said on the record that nothing that happened was unlawful and nothing that happened was criminal. She said in fact that the state of our institutions and the rule of law are intact. She said:
I do not want members of this committee or Canadians to think that the integrity of our institutions has somehow evaporated. The integrity of our justice system, the integrity of the director of public prosecutions and prosecutors, is intact.
Given that evidence and given that there is a desire from the opposition to get to the root of the matter, I put it to the member opposite that the Ethics Commissioner is doing an investigation in which they have powers to summon witnesses, have them put under oath, give evidence and produce documents. In this matter they have the same powers as a court of record.
Is that not the best venue for seeking the answers that the opposition clamours for in this case?