Subcommittee on a Code of Conduct for Members committee  Sorry. The one thing I wanted to add in there is that there needs to be a process to keep track of complaints. You need to be able to find out if someone has been repeatedly complained about. I'll leave it at that. Sorry, thank you.

Subcommittee on a Code of Conduct for Members committee  I think it is a good one. The Senate policy on harassment is slightly more ambiguously worded and I think I approve of it a bit more. It says that the policy applies to “work-related activities conducted away from the Senate workplace” in addition to things conducted in the workplace.

Subcommittee on a Code of Conduct for Members committee  I understand the struggle you're having, and all I can say is that I'm glad I'm on this side of the table rather than the other. It really does depend on how you are viewing this code. Is this a workplace code intended to create a healthy work environment? If it is that, then the gamut and the tools of discipline should be fairly limited.

Subcommittee on a Code of Conduct for Members committee  What you can do depends on the instrument you've employed. If this is done along the lines of the conflict of interest attached to the Standing Orders, I think it has to be related to formal parliamentary functions, which as you recognize is only a limited subset of an MP's contact with other MPs.

Subcommittee on a Code of Conduct for Members committee  No. You would need to establish facts. I strongly believe you do not need a criminal finding of guilt to remove a member because that's a technical thing: are you guilty of that charge? From a political point of view the suitability of the House is: have you done things which undermine our confidence in your ability to function as an MP?

Subcommittee on a Code of Conduct for Members committee  You could make the facts anonymous but the facts should be known.

Subcommittee on a Code of Conduct for Members committee  It is very problematic, and I don't have any ready answer. I can share that there are three layers of problem-solving that I could see. One is at the initial lower level where it is really an interpersonal issue where mediation and reconciliation can occur, and that's a good, positive healing thing for having a positive work environment.

Subcommittee on a Code of Conduct for Members committee  I think that when it gets to the case of a serious issue, where discipline needs to be public, then it should go through the usual process for disciplining a member. So usually it would be referred to the committee and then back to the House for a final sanction, if needed. Most harassment issues, I would imagine, would be dealt with at the mediation stage.

Subcommittee on a Code of Conduct for Members committee  Yes, I think it would be possible for a third-party fact-finder to have an anonymized version of the statement of facts of what had occurred, and for that to be presented to the House for consideration. Based on that finding of fact, should the House proceed with the disciplining of a member?

Subcommittee on a Code of Conduct for Members committee  One question I have is whether one can rely on the existing model for MP staff harassment to go through the whip. The Senate harassment policy goes through the whip. There's a question whether there could be sufficient public confidence that the whip would deal with internal matters satisfactorily.

Subcommittee on a Code of Conduct for Members committee  Thank you for inviting me to participate. I'm tickled pink to do it, even from this distance. The committee is looking at a very important policy development and I think it's high time that a code of conduct was developed to govern relationships between MPs. This would close a gap but others remain, as we'll see later in the discussion.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I think that's a very good and piercing question, actually.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  There are two ways to answer that. One way is that if one was just going to set out to create a new convention, I think Professor Russell was suggesting there'd be some statement that was agreed to by all the leaders of the parties and you would need all four in order to do it, and that would be, in essence, the normal way of instantly creating a new convention, because all the major actors would have agreed.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  There's no easy answer to that one. It comes back to an early question of how the public views the political system and the rules and the facts of the case. I think one unfortunate misunderstanding among many in the public is a very fractured notion of what the role of the House of Commons is in the political system.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Yes. I do appreciate the kind of extraordinary circumstances that have brought us to this juncture, but I think the likely continuation of minority governments, in the intermediate future anyway, makes it important for the House to consider the role of the House in the governing process and the parliamentary agenda-setting process.