Liberal black sheep Nathaniel Erskine-Smith says he asked to be removed from one of the two committees he served on — and did not specifically ask to stay on the public safety committee he was removed from Tuesday.

“I previously had two committees, and had indicated to the whip’s office that I’d prefer one,” he said. “While I was moved from [the public safety committee], I became vice-chair of [the ethics committee] at the same time.”

The decision by Liberal whip Pablo Rodriguez to switch him off the public safety committee follows a request by fellow Liberal members of the committee to former Liberal whip Andrew Leslie to “rein in” the Toronto-area MP after a particularly tense meeting of that committee in November, iPolitics has learned.

In light of that, some opposition members of the public safety committee said the decision to not keep him on that committee was curious.

While going through clause-by-clause consideration of C-22, which seeks to establish a national security committee of parliamentarians, rookie Liberal members were essentially tricked into deleting a major clause of the bill after Oakville-North Burlington MP Pam Damoff and Eglington-Lawrence MP Marco Mendicino agreed to heed Erskine-Smith’s push for cooperation and cut a deal with Conservative public safety critic Tony Clement.

Erskine-Smith had been a vocal proponent of listening to concerns from the Conservatives and NDP and sought to find ways to reconcile their proposed amendments with the language in the bill.

Critics — including Access to Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault — had slammed the bill’s wording as overly vague, saying it gives too much discretion to ministers in deciding whether to disclose information requested by the committee. Opposition members sought to restrict the cases where ministers can refuse disclosure.

Erskine-Smith repeatedly played a conciliatory role on the committee, trying to bring the Liberal members on board to tighten and clarify several key measures.

But after he supported the discussion between members that ended in what turned out to be a bit of a bait-and-switch — where Liberals accidentally deleted their own clause — Erskine-Smith’s fellow party members apparently decided enough was enough.

Multiple sources have told iPolitics the Liberal members went directly to Leslie during a committee break and asked him to intervene with Erskine-Smith, who is now listed online as vice-chair of the committee reviewing access to information laws.

New Brunswick MP René Arseneault, a corporate and civil lawyer and first-time MP, will take over on the public safety committee in Erskine-Smith’s place.

The change comes as expectations grow that the Liberals will soon move to announce promised changes to C-51, the former government’s controversial anti-terrorism legislation.

Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale said Tuesday he expects to introduce those changes before the summer, but said he could not speak to whether the looming tabling of those adjustments — which will need to pass through the same public safety committee Erskine-Smith was removed from — was a factor in the move.

“That’s a decision that is made by the caucus and the whip,” he said. “It’s a process of trying to be fair to all members, to ensure they have balanced workload responsibilities, that they are doing good work on the areas that are of interest to them, and it rotates from time to time.”

Reforming C-51 was a key pillar of the 2015 Liberal campaign platform and the government has been soliciting feedback for months on how best to fix it through its national security policy reviews.

The legislation was introduced by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government in January 2015 and became law just before Parliament rose prior to the election that summer.

At its core, the legislation allows for greater information-sharing between 17 government departments and agencies and includes a controversial set of rules on who may be monitored if they are deemed to be a threat to the security of Canada.

As well, C-51 grants ‘kinetic’ powers of intervention to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, allowing it to take physical action to stop threats. Before C-51, the agency’s mandate was limited to gathering and analyzing information.

It also weakened the thresholds police must meet when seeking peace bonds against individuals believed to be involved in terrorism activities.

Criticism of the legislation has largely focused on its broad language and the lack of corresponding oversight to go along with the greater powers for government agencies.

The Liberals promised to reform “problematic elements” of the bill, including narrowing the definition of “terrorist propaganda” that the bill gives police the power to target, and requiring that the Communications Security Establishment — Canada’s foreign signals intelligence agency — obtain warrants to surveil Canadians.

Critics have suggested that the government is falling behind when it comes to launching its promised reforms but physical work on the legislation is only one part of the eight-part pledge the Liberals made during the campaign.

Several elements of that have already been launched, including the creation of legislation to establish a national security committee of parliamentarians, requiring the government to review all appeals of Canadians on the no-fly list, and creating an Office of the Community Outreach and Counter-Radicalization Coordinator.

However, it is not yet clear when the Liberals plan to specifically introduce legislation to reform C-51 itself.