From the Mulroney/Schreiber Files: So … is that a yes or a no?

From the Mulroney Media Room:

The following letter was delivered to Richard Rumas, Committee Clerk, today:

Sir:

Prior to Mr. Mulroney considering the Committee’s request for his re-appearance, please advise as to the subjects the members want to canvass that have not already been covered by Mr. Mulroney and other witnesses during the Committee’s lengthy hearings, and which were the subject of the Committee’s final report and recommendations to Parliament.

Yours truly,

Mtre Tommy Tremblay, on behalf of Mtre Guy J. Pratte.

Actually, it sounds more like ‘Why?’ but that hasn’t stopped the Ethics committee from putting the Right Honourable Brian Mulroney on the witness schedule for next Thursday’s meeting.

Oh, and remember that opposition day motion to amend the Conflict of Interest Code in response to the Dawson ruling on Robert Thibault?  It sailed through the House last night: YEAS: 145, NAYS: 115, which means that if the former Prime Minister does show up, Liberal MP Robert Thibault should, in theory, be just as free to question him as any other member of the committee, regardless of the defamation lawsuit.

Incidentally, the debate over the motion is a must-read for all those parliamentary geeks out there (and you know who you are). I’ll try to post a few of the highlights later today.