Madam Speaker, handing over these documents is not a matter of political choice; it is actually a matter of law. The Liberals should not think of themselves as being above the law.
I will observe for the benefit of the member that when PHAC was first asked about these issues, the president of PHAC did not invoke national security. He actually invoked the Privacy Act. The idea that there is a national security problem with handing over these documents is a talking point that was invented later. It was not the rationale used in the first place for not handing over the documents.
Finally, I want to put to the member that the second motion, adopted by the committee on May 10, was moved by the member for Cumberland—Colchester, a Liberal member. A member of his own caucus moved a motion to demand the documents. That motion was adopted unanimously by the committee. Every single Liberal member of the committee voted to have the documents handed over to the law clerk, reviewed by the law clerk and redacted by the law clerk, and then given to the committee in camera, which was a secure process endorsed by the Liberal members of the committee.
The member does not have to like the Speaker's ruling, but the Speaker has ruled on a matter of law and on the obligations of Parliament. The Speaker has ruled that NSICOP is not a parliamentary committee. That is clear in law and it is clear in the Speaker's ruling.
Does the member believe that the government has an obligation to comply with the law in this case?