Interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae speaks during Question Period in the House of Commons on Feb. 14, 2012.
The Liberals want Parliament to clear up the rules over when it's appropriate to move committee meetings behind closed doors, arguing the number of secret meetings is on the rise.
Yet a review of committee records under the days of Liberal majority governments reveals the Grits routinely went behind closed doors to discuss the very subjects they now say should be public.
The Liberals are proposing a change to House of Commons rules that would list specific acceptable grounds for a committee to move in camera, such as discussion of personnel matters or draft reports.
"We're now in a situation where the Conservatives are trying to turn every committee meeting into some secret star chamber proceeding and we think that's nuts," Interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae said Wednesday. "No other parliamentary democracy runs this way."
However the Liberal list does not include committee discussion among MPs over future business, such as what to study and who to hear from. That's the area at the heart of recent battles between the Conservatives and opposition.
Some background is in order here.
The controversy traces back to a Dec. 13 meeting of the government operations committee, in which two rookie NDP MPs – Alexandre Boulerice and Mathieu Ravignat – wanted to discuss and vote on future witnesses in public.
The Conservative vice-chair, Mike Wallace, intervened, arguing that such discussions have always been held in private.
"I don't see what the big issue is," Mr. Ravignat shot back at the time. "All [Mr. Boulerice]s doing is moving that we hear some witnesses. What's the problem? It's another example of the 'shut up' government, right?"
The debate ultimately did move behind closed doors, but the incident triggered weeks of accusations that the Conservatives – and Mr. Wallace in particular – was orchestrating a new plan to increase the number of closed-door hearings.
In an interview this week, Mr. Wallace said he made a "mistake" by not being clear later that he only wanted discussion of "future business" to be in-camera. He said the point is to allow MPs to speak freely about why they might not want particular witnesses, without airing that criticism publicly.
"And that is not to protect the Member of Parliament. In my view, it's to protect those who are going to be discussed, and have no opportunity to defend themselves or their organization or promote what they're doing. It's just fair to everybody. So it's only future business that has been in camera – I don't know why we even have to discuss it. It's been a tradition around here for many, many decades.
"I made the motion. I worded it poorly. I made the motion on the spot because I couldn't believe what they were doing," he said.
A review of past committee records supports Mr. Wallace's position that the discussion of future witnesses has often been held behind closed doors.
For instance, the minutes of a Feb. 24, 2004 meeting of the government operations committee under the Liberal majority government of Paul Martin, clearly show the first part of the meeting was in camera. The list of witnesses the committee agreed to was only revealed via the minutes after the committee had ended.
When asked about the Liberal record in government, Liberal House Leader Marc Garneau said Wednesday's proposal represents the party's current position.
"We're telling you what our position is today," Mr. Garneau said. "We thought the onus was on us to define when we go in-camera or in secret."
It is impossible for the public or the media to know with certainty whether the Conservative closed-door hearings are justified, or whether they are being used as a cover to overrule the opposition's requests without public scrutiny.
Opposition MPs say there is a sense that in camera sessions are on the rise. Liberals claim the Conservatives moved the veterans affairs committee behind closed doors this week simply to block a Liberal motion on privacy issues.
Meanwhile the NDP has already triggered an official review of these rules. The procedure and House affairs committee, which like all Commons committees is dominated by Conservatives, has approved a motion from NDP Whip Chris Charlton to conduct a study of the use of secret "in camera sessions" across the committee system.
That decision was made by the House affairs committee while it was itself in an in-camera session.