Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm in favour of these types of amendments, particularly to appoint a by-law officer in municipalities where liquor is prohibited. But in the Minister's opening remarks, he indicated that the Minister may appoint by-law officers which are currently in place at the municipalities. And in the chairman's remarks for our Legislation committee, he indicated that only the Minister may appoint by-law officers in municipalities. So I am getting two different signals from the chairman of Legislation and also from the Minister responsible for the bill.

In his remarks, he indicated that this bill would allow the Minister to appoint by-law officers serving in a liquor-prohibited community, special by-law officers, with authority to search, seize, et cetera, and he points out that these special by-law officers would only -- and I emphasize "only" -- be appointed from a group of by-law officers who are already in place within a municipality.

Now, the chairman from our Legislation committee indicates, in general terms, that the Minister may appoint by-law officers in municipalities where liquor is prohibited to be special by-law officers for the purpose of searching, et cetera. Now, who is correct? Is it just generally? Because I would oppose this bill, Mr. Speaker, because I have a community which I would say is a medium-sized community, which doesn't have RCMP, which is a dry community and even if this bill is passed there would be no provision -- if the Minister's remarks are correct -- for them to appoint a special by-law officer for that municipality. So if I can get some clarification, Mr. Chairman, I would appreciate it. Mahsi.