Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On Bill 32, An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act, No. 2, I have received a lot of form letters from my constituents. Someone must have done a good campaign on this one. I have a concern about clause 2. I have no problem with a Member not sitting as a Member if the Member is convicted of an offence under the Criminal Code, prosecution by indictment involving the sexual exploitation of children.

The second one is in the commission of which violence against a person is used, threatened or attempted. In (b), I understand Mr. Dent's arguments and I understand the majority of the people who support this one in this House. However, one area I'm concerned about is, as an aboriginal person --and this happened across Canada already --in some areas where aboriginal people do not like what the government is doing in their territories, they take up action against the government in the form of roadblocks; taking positions on what they believe in. This is the area that I'm concerned about, that if a Member of the Legislative Assembly --and the majority of these people take a roadblock action against the government John Todd were to get his northern accord through but the Deh Cho didn't agree with it, if he were to permit oil companies to go in an area and people take action --that may be a bad example, but let's say that's an example that could happen -- the Members of the Legislative Assembly who represent these people would want to be with their people. If that happens, then what would happen to the Member in this case if they were convicted by taking such an action against the government? Would that person lose his seat because he has taken action with the people who he is representing?

I wonder if this Assembly or the Standing Committee on Legislation has ever looked at that part of this legislation, because it could happen, it has happened across the country. Because such an action, if people are convicted under the Criminal Code, such as has happened in other parts of the

country...A good example, I'm told, is that in the beginning of this country, Louis Riel, the founder of Manitoba, was elected fairly and squarely by the people in Manitoba. When he went to Ottawa, the government of the day would not allow him to take his seat because he was convicted under the Criminal Code; something to that effect. This is quite an extreme, but we're setting this bill up for the future and we have to be careful how we do it. This is the part of the bill I have had concern with. In talking to other people and my constituents about this, there is no problem with the intent of the other parts of this bill, but I'm concerned about that part of this bill ... if that scenario has been explored; if not, why? If you have, can you tell me, if you could find out if this concern has been addressed? Thank you.