Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On this one, I am not too sure where I stand. Personally, I think we have to take into mind that the person we are speaking about here was put in place by the Members in the House, knowing that there is no actual training or course you can take to become a Conflict of Interest Commissioner. On the one hand, you are trying to be a lawyer. On the other hand, you are trying to give someone advice on what is right or wrong and somehow keep your head above water, knowing that you will be zeroed in on by the press, that they will want to talk to you every once in a while.
From what I see happening here, for the next Commissioner coming down the pipe, we are going to have to give them a whole list of what not to do and put it in the terms of reference to tie their hands from doing their job.
From what I see here, there does not seem to be an opportunity for due process for an individual or individuals who do not have opportunity to see exactly what their legal obligations are. From the way this is drafted, if you do not give us this, we move to plan b and if you don't give us that, we go to plan c. Three strikes, you are out.
I think there has to be a serious look at what her legal arrangement is with this government in regard to a contractual arrangement and what due process are we following in the context of what the responsibility of this committee was when they went to these public hearings. Was it to look at the Conflict Commissioner's duties and what she did or did not do?
I feel that, as a Member, in your statement, you state that the relationship between the Members and the Conflict of Interest Commissioner has, in our view, broken down. I was not made known of that. I was not approached and asked what I thought of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner and where I stand on it.
I think she is a person in circumstances that happen to be just caught in the middle of this -- I was going to mention Watergate again. I think I realize that the circumstances in which she found herself, being at the end of allegations of who she spoke to, when she spoke to and exactly what she said, if we are going to allow people who represent us in that capacity as Commissioners or the Conflict of Interest Commissioner, we do have to allow them some flexibility to do their jobs. If we are going to start muzzling people from talking to the press and having the flexibility of talking with Members on where things are going, I feel that in my case, it was the Board of Management that did not even give me the opportunity to respond against allegations made against myself. It was done by the Board of Management and they could go talk to the press before they came and talked to me. Now you are saying the same thing about a Conflict of Interest Commissioner, so I am finding it kind of hard to sit here and say exactly where do you stand on this one?
I for one feel that due process has not been followed here. You do have to allow time, basically putting a time deadline in place and if that does not happen, you basically go to the final option, which is the Commissioner of the Northwest Territories. On this one, I cannot support it on the basis that it does not feel right and there has to be due process. I do not think that is taking place here. As a Member, I feel we should have been given that opportunity to make that choice on where we stand with regard to the Conflict of Interest Commissioner and the circumstances she finds herself in.
Everyone knew when she was hired that she was not located in the Northwest Territories, that the relationship was not on a day-to-day basis and the communication with her was usually over the phone. I feel that knowing these restrictions were in place and the circumstances were probably a lot different than having a Conflict of Interest Commissioner who was accessible to the Legislative Assembly over someone who lived in Vancouver was a problem. Yet knowing that, that was one of the conditions she was hired under. With the job that she has been trying to do from a distance, it is a factor.
I for one feel that due process has to be taking place here and I do not see it.