Are the interviews taped?

If I may, Mr. Chairman. No the interviews are not taped.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I indicated before, I think interviews are very subjective. If the interviews are not taped, nobody from FMBS is actually there to verify what was said or not said, so how do you determine what to do when there is a discrepancy in what the interviewers are saying happened and the appellant is saying they said something else in answer to their question.

The reason for a hearing and having independent counsel, is to provide that person with an objective forum in which to appeal their position. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I realize that it is an attempt to have an objective hearing. However, if there was nobody there monitoring the interview, only the people from the departments are there doing the interview, there is no way to prove what he or she actually said. How do they determine, if there is a discrepancy about what someone had said in response to a question, who is right?

I am not trying to limit debate on this issue, but I would like to suggest to my colleague that this whole debate on affirmative action, which is a legitimate one, perhaps if there are some fundamental changes that the

House wants changed, it may be appropriate to get into that when we table the paper, and I am trying to move forward as quickly as possible.

Again, I am not attempting to bring closure to the discussion. I am merely saying that we can have a healthier debate there, and the House can provide me with some of the directions to some of the changes they may want in the appeal process or other aspects of affirmative action.

However, an answer to his question is you have to evaluate the probabilities. You have to assume that the hearing process is fair. You have to assume it is objective, because we have an independent chairperson. That is the way the system works across Canada when it comes to appeals. If there are some changes that are being talked about here, then I think we will listen to that, and look for some direction on that. But right now we do not tape those appeals and we assume that peer process is fair and the independent chairperson can look at the issue objectively. That is the intent of it. If that is not happening and there is some concern about it I would suggest to my colleague that we give serious consideration to this overall issue of affirmative action and how it is being handled when the paper comes forward. But I will respect his decision if we continue to discuss it today. But that will be my suggestion.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, just a final question under the Directorate for the Minister. At one time we had a proposal about eliminating some of the positions. I see, providing an evaluation, and the office of the regional area superintendent. What exactly is that?

I am terribly sorry Mr. Speaker, I did not quite catch the question. It did not come through, which is rare for Mr. Picco, but I am sure he will be only to happy to repeat it. Thank you.

The Directorate contains the offices of the controller general, secretary of the Financial Management Board, and so on and so forth, and it also controls the offices of the regional and area superintendents. So my question was, what does that entail from the FMBS?

Thank you. It entails, if he is talking about the regional offices, it entails the regional office, the staff and their responsibilities. He has one in his area which Mr. Neish I believe is the superintendent, so that is what it entails. Regional offices. Was that the question.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I understand regionally... so you are saying you have a regional superintendent for FMBS, or you might have an area superintendent for FMBS? That was my point. I just wanted clarification on that.

Thank you. My apologies. Know I understand. Five regional superintendents we have, and one area superintendent in Fort Simpson.