Notice of Point of Order / Privilege Item 2

COMMONS DEBATES December 1, 2009

***
POINTS OF ORDER

PROVISION OF INFORMATION TO STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL DEFENCE

• (1540)

Mr. Derek Lee (Scarborough - Rouge River): Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order that
relates to the privileges of the House.

During question period today the Minister of National Defence indicated to the House that the
Canada Evidence Act obstructed or impaired the ability of the government to provide
information to the Standing Committee on National Defence in connection with a matter it is
studying now.

As members know, the House has the power to send for persons, papers and records. That
power delegated to committees is unimpaired by any statute, unless the statute explicitly
mentions the parliamentary power, and the Canada Evidence Act does not in this case.

In this particular case, the general view is that it is contemptuous to mislead or obstruct the
House in relation to its privileges, and it is quite possible that the minister has inadvertently or
advertently misled the House with respect to this matter of privilege.

Therefore, I would invite the minister to come back to clarify this. If he is suggesting that the
Canada Evidence Act prevents the government from disclosing documents, it is my view that it
obstructs the House and is wrong in law, and that the matter must be taken up as a matter of
privilege.

The reason I am somewhat familiar with this is that eight years ago it almost happened. The
House was considering amendments to the Canada Evidence Act, and through inadvertence a
lawyer somewhere in the Department of Justice actually inserted a reference to Parliament.
Those words were removed before the amendment was made, with the specific objective of
ensuring that Parliament's powers in relation to persons, papers and records remained unimpaired
and unencumbered.

The minister's answer today left me with no other conclusion than that the government was
using this section to avoid making disclosure and that he may have inadvertently misinformed
the House and the public. If he has done so advertently, then it is clear to me that it is a matter of
privilege and I would be prepared to take it up forthwith.

However, I think we should allow the minister an opportunity to clarify this and he could do
so directly with members in the House or he could give me a phone call. In my view, it should be
done.

I am putting the House on notice now that I do see a potential serious matter of privilege here.

2-1
 Notice of Point of Order / Privilege Item 2

Excerpt Taken From:

Debates of the House of Commons Canada, Dec. 1, 2009, 2rd Session, 40th Parliament.
Ottawa: Queen’s Printer for Canada, 2009.

2-2