Procedure and House Affairs committee  There are things that are offensive, and those, normally, the courts of law will not rule on. Then there are things that are harmful, on which they will. The issue that faces the committee here is do these problems, in both issues of contempt of Parliament, reach the point of a

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I might, if I dig back into my 60 years' memory on this, find one or two places where I felt a cabinet minister had actually broken the bond of trust. But by and large, I have the utmost respect for the politicians of Canada, even when I've firmly and basically disagreed with the

Procedure and House Affairs committee  May I respond to that, sir?

Procedure and House Affairs committee  It will be a 30-second response.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  We have two sides to the question here. One side says that the minister said that she never supported the grant and tried to make that clear, and did to Parliament, is correct. The other side is saying that the document presented to Parliament, which purported to represent the ag

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Yes. I think that the Clerk of the Privy Council—and we've had very good ones—has too many hats. He is the guardian of the Constitution, he's the deputy minister to the Prime Minister, he's the secretary to the cabinet and the guardian of cabinet records, and he's the head of t

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I attribute no motives to people in this. I just believe that there was a better way for the minister to have said that she didn't agree with it, and that's as far as I can go on it.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  You're asking me to go beyond what I consider my remit. I had a very short time to write this, and that's one of the reasons why in my chronology I said this is how I think I see it or how it appears, and I don't know. When I get down to the question of the signature I either lo

Procedure and House Affairs committee  We at this point--and that's me as a citizen of the country and you as parliamentarians--do not know how the “not” got there. What we do know is that the minister did not repudiate that “not”. I don't think there is any more issue than that. The letter was presented, purported a

Procedure and House Affairs committee  The whodunnit is for somebody else to look at. The fact that it was done is the one that I think must concern you people today.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Senior public servants in Britain are much more intimidating creatures, I believe, to members of Parliament--and even to cabinet ministers--than they often are in Canada. Somebody like the current cabinet secretary has immense influence, has survived I believe four prime minister

Procedure and House Affairs committee  The thing that puzzled me about it is the absolute silliness of presenting a document--which I still believe was falsified--to a parliamentary committee that purported to represent the consent of the three signers and actually did not. I shouldn't say “consent”, but the “opinio

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I don’t think so, because the principle of ministerial responsibility applies to the minister, in this case, Ms. Oda. The matter of the Prime Minister’s intentions is something else altogether. I think that the concerns must be with the minister herself, and not the Prime Minist

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Ministers have to sign thousands of documents, and even deputy ministers do. The Clerk of the Privy Council has to sign probably hundreds of thousands. And normally the act of using that signature machine is a very carefully managed and guarded act, so that only documents that th

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I accept that totally, with one qualification. My understanding is that the two senior public servants signed the document and then subsequently the “not” was put in. In other words, they signed the document saying that the grant should be made, and the document, once signed by t