About that Dean Del Mastro point of order ....

Over to Brad Butt for what will, it seems, will be a short round., due to -- well, *my* inadvetent up-ending of the entire meeting by attempting to get a copy of the motion that will be debated during committee business, which - as noted in this entry - was *not* listed as in camera. Unfortunately, that involved a frantic attempt to confirm that with the opposition staff before the gavel went down, which the Conservatives, not unreasonably, mistook as an attempt to see secret information.

In any case, no confidentiality was breached, although I *am* sorry for causing a commotion - and for inadvertently bringing proceedings to a premature end! 

A little context for readers who may be unfamiliar with the rules governing in camera proceedings: As long as a meeting is scheduled to be held in public, the substance of any motion to be debated during committee business is, itself, public -- right up until a member successfully moves to go in camera. 

Today's meeting was, in fact, listed as public -- you can check the notice right here -- including the second item on the agenda: 'committee business'. 

When I saw a motion being distributed during the final round of questioning, I assumed that it was a motion, and, as is my usual practice, I immediately headed for the nearest available source -- in this case, opposition staffers, and the nearest opposition MP -- to get a copy before someone moved to go in camera, which, these days, usually happens as soon as the witnesses leave the table. 

When i realized that it was actually a draft report -- which, for the record, is usually indicated on the notice --  I backed off immediately, but not quite quickly enough to dodge the resulting point of order, which the chair waved away on the grounds that the meeting was in public at the time, and contrary to the initial suggestion, I had not been given a copy of the draft report. (Before I left, I assured the chair that no material, confidential or otherwise, had changed hands.)  

That, I assumed, was that.  (For the record, this entire episode took place in public, in full view of the entire committee room.) 

Apparently, I was wrong. 

In any case, just to make it absolutely, positively clear, I apologize wholeheartedly to the members and staff of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics for any confusion or alarm that they may have experienced when confronted with the possibility that a breach of privilege may have taken place before their very eyes. 

I can assure them -- and the rest of you --  that it did not. 

I may gripe about excessive committee secrecy, but I have far too much respect for this place, and the rules and conventions that govern it, to ever knowingly break parliamentary law, including the rule that protects the contents of a report until it is duly tabled in the House of Commons.