Canada-China Relations committee  As I said, it's hard to reconcile the two. My recollection is that the facts were different and that the order issued was different. The ruling was different in that ultimately he expected the parties would agree. Ultimately, they did come up with a mechanism that was—

Canada-China Relations committee  Thank you for the question. Respectfully, the power to send for records is not absolute. That is the position that we're taking. It must be balanced and circumscribed by principles—

Canada-China Relations committee  —of the separation of powers.

Canada-China Relations committee  The ruling ultimately, if I recall correctly, amounted to an order from the House.

Canada-China Relations committee  Our position is essentially that ultimately there are limits on the ability to produce documents as called for—

Canada-China Relations committee  With respect, I don't think we can square the two. My recollection of the Milliken ruling is that ultimately he asked that parties discuss the matter and that they come up with a solution.

Canada-China Relations committee  I do believe that Speaker Milliken had the authority to make the ruling and that it applied to the legislature, in essence. There is a separation between the executive and the legislature. These rulings—it's the same with decisions made by committees—have an impact within the bou

Canada-China Relations committee  Right.

Canada-China Relations committee  I'm speaking in relation to the powers of committees as well.

Canada-China Relations committee  Thank you for your question. Basically, we recognize the jurisdiction of committees to request documents and to call witnesses. That said, in terms of paragraph 8(2)(c), we're talking about a jurisdiction to compel. There's a difference of opinion here. We don't recognize the co

Canada-China Relations committee  Good evening, Mr. Chair. Good evening, committee members. I don't have any opening remarks, but I'll gladly answer questions.