Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to think I am a neutral person in this matter. It is far away from my riding and I am not familiar with any of the details. However, Mr. Chairman, I agree with the Member for Deh Cho. I am alarmed to see the children in care are going to be interviewed about an issue that has received significant publicity. I understand these children are adolescents. It would be fair to say that being in care and being subject to the views about the department about issues like whether and when they will be returned to home could be described as being vulnerable and easily influenced.

Mr. Chairman, in my understanding of the situation, I thought that the main dispute was involving adults, the operator of the home and officials of the department. It was described as a relationship which had completely broken down. I would have hoped that the terms of reference would be clearly focused on the relations and the breakdown of relations between these adults who were responsible for this contract.

I do not believe that the children can provide helpful advice. If I know anything about teenage children, they may provide comments about their own parents or about those who are acting in loco parentis, that are actually critical, but maybe for the wrong reasons. My children are critical of me, but it is sometimes because I have taken strong stands on issues that I believe sincerely are in their best interests, such as curfew, et cetera.

Mr. Chairman, my strong view is that it would be unfortunate if the children are drawn into this matter and subjected to the stress of having to take a position in a highly publicized case, when I think it is well known that the children are probably aware of how the department feels about the contractor, namely that the department has seen fit to terminate the contract. I think this is an unfortunate emphasis in the terms of reference. My advice would be keep the kids out of it.

Mr. Chairman, just looking at the facts and listening to comments of other Members, I have some doubts about the independence of the investigator. I note that the investigator is a registered social worker and a principle in a private firm in Yellowknife, who has been in the private sector for the past ten years completing a variety of consulting projects in the social services field.

Mr. Chairman, we all know the government is the big game in town in all parts of the Northwest Territories. I suspect that this individual has had to rely on the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Department of Social Services to survive for ten years consulting in the social services field. Directly or indirectly, I suspect there is a strong relationship there. I actually have received some information that corroborates what other Members have said. The individual described in the Member's statement is, in fact, a principle of a company called Muskox Program Development and this company either has a standing offer agreement with the Department of Social Services or has a relationship with officials in the Department of Social Services -- specifically, Mr. Andrew Langford -- which sees that firm regularly being asked to do work.

The mere fact that the contractor has done work for the department in the past, coupled with the fact that there is not a lot of work outside the government sector for a firm in this very specialized field, indicates to me that there is, at least, an interest on the part of the investigator in not offending the department in undertaking this investigation. I welcome some further comment. We have been told there isn't a standing offer agreement, but perhaps there is a working relationship, understanding or pattern of working relationships. I would have to question whether someone more independent, such as a lawyer, might have been found to do this work.

If we are going to solve what is probably a matter of human relations between the contractor and the department, we should hope that the parties have confidence in the investigator and that both parties feel that if the job will be done, they will participate and cooperate with some confidence that the outcome will be fair. I would like to ask the Minister and/or the deputy minister if they know whether the contractor has confidence in the investigator. I see the department does. Does the contractor? If the contractor doesn't, I question whether it is going to be a complete investigation. Thank you.