Okay, well that's news to me.
Again, I think that this is a cart-before-the-horse thing. It might be that what you have produced is worthy of adoption or consideration, but the way in which it was put forward I think is very concerning to us.
Mr. Christopherson, who is not here today but is an eminent member of this committee, said at that same meeting, “You start talking Standing Orders, and I mean the House owns the orders, not the Clerk's department.”
I again want to lay down that marker. I don't know what would now prevent a future clerk, or what prevents any part of the apparatus that serves members of Parliament, from embarking on similar good-faith initiatives. They may actually be done in good faith, but if they're not directed by members of this committee, members of the House, then I would argue that they are in fact counter to the very thing Mr. Christopherson stated, that this should be done on the request of the House.
Again, these are our Standing Orders. The Speaker constantly refers to the fact that he cannot act outside of these rules because he is a servant of the House.
I would ask, perhaps in another way, who else has been assisting with this? Have you been assisted through the government House leader's office or the Privy Council Office or the Speaker's office to undertake this initiative and to produce the document that we have in front of us?