Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have been a politician for ten years -- I should correct that. I have been a politician for longer than that but I have been a territorial politician, an MLA for ten years. It still manages to astound me how we can take a molehill and turn it into a mountain.

We have been talking very seriously here today about the issues. I think we have to remember that this all started with an inadvertent clerical error. That is all it was. That is where this all came from; an inadvertent clerical error. All of a sudden, we are talking about issues of confidence.

I have had a number of constituents that have phoned and asked did we really need this process? Unfortunately, yes, we did. A government is based on trust and integrity and that came into question, subsequent to the allegations of conflict. Once those allegations were on the table, then the public deserved to know whether or not that worry about trust or integrity was founded or not founded. Thus we came to the report of the special committee on Tuesday with their four recommendations. On Wednesday, we discussed those recommendations. Three of those recommendations were passed, adopted by this House by a majority vote. The fourth did not need to be because Mrs. Groenewegen took action herself and resigned.

Mr. Speaker, like all motions, we only vote on the "be it resolved clause." However, must motions have one or more "whereas clauses" to set out the reasons behind the action that is requested? That is the way that I read the reports lead in to their recommendation.

In discussions last Wednesday, the Premier more or less told the House and the public that he had dealt with the issue and did not have to respond to the reasons this special committee had put forward for their final recommendation.

Mr. Speaker, I think the response from the Premier was troubling to a number of us. To me, his words, his tone and his manner seemed an attack on the committee and its report. Mr. Speaker, I believe the Premier has ultimate responsibility for the actions of those in his office. On Wednesday, I did not sense or hear any ownership of that problem. The Premier said he had dealt with the trust and confidence issues in his office. Obviously, because we are here today, Mr. Premier, not everybody was satisfied with that response.

The special committee had heard the evidence, weighed it and unanimously put forward their recommendations. So it should have come as no surprise to the Premier that some Members were upset when he said that he had already done more than he should have done.

Subsequently, I guess some Members must have called for his resignation. I did not hear that. It did not happen in any meeting that I was at so I am not sure, but he obviously felt that somebody was calling for his resignation.

Mr. Speaker, let us put that into perspective. How many times has a Member of the House of Commons suggested that the Prime Minister should resign? More times than I can count. The Prime Minister does not pick up his ball and go home because he feels that people do not want to play by his rules.

However, our Premier said that he "Could not survive and work with confidence when people threaten me every other month. That is not acceptable." Mr. Speaker, in most Assemblies, this happens every second day, not every second month.

Now, maybe part of the problem is that we probably have the most polite Legislative Assembly in the British Commonwealth. It is certainly the most polite in Canada. Does that mean that every time that one of us in this House does not support government action, the threat of government resignation will be tossed out?

I would like to remind the government that a majority in this House opposed the hotel tax. There was nobody that called for the resignation of the government. There were no calls made there. I believe the majority of the Members of this House opposed the road toll. If that fails, I certainly will not be calling for the government's resignation. So why has this issue turned into a constitutional crisis? I am not really sure. It only had two important bills, the hotel tax and the road tolls, and those do not seem to be issues of confidence. However, a recommendation that the Premier deal with an issue of integrity and confidence in his office has led us to this point.

Mr. Speaker, time and time again we have heard about the importance of openness, integrity and honesty in government. We have heard the Premier say how important those things are to him. So after the report that the special committee came out, I think many of us expected to see some action.

Mr. Speaker, most of us have been around for a while so I do not think anybody really expected to see anybody get fired. You know, the typical government response is the sideways shuffle. A couple of people find jobs somewhere else, work in another department, they are on a special project but they are out of the Premier's office so that the public has the confidence in the system and the integrity of the advice the Premier receives restored.

Instead, we were told by the Premier that the actions which we took stand on are not going to be revisited and further on, that any actions he takes will not include revisiting these decisions. It is pretty clear that we were not going to see any further action.

Mr. Speaker, in my opinion, as it seems to have turned into an issue of confidence and we have to talk about our confidence in the government. In my opinion, most of the time this government has done the right thing. Most of the time, I have supported the government.

Things like the Non-Renewable Resource Development Strategy, Maximizing Northern Employment, critical investments in initiatives like looking at the hydro projects, the support for devolution, support for pipeline development, I have had no problems supporting the government when they have made calls to action to support them in those areas.

However, those issues are not what have brought us here today. We are talking about this motion today only because of the report of the special committee. I have to say that I was very troubled by the way the Premier has responded this past week. To me, it appeared that he was ignoring the concern of publicly elected representatives and sought public support.

I believe that he showed a lack of respect by setting up a press conference while the House was in session. In fact, we were still in question period when he was addressing reporters.

The Premier is now on a public campaign, citing behind closed doors calls for his resignation. That is not the actions I would expect from a seasoned politician.

Mr. Speaker, I do not believe that we should be doing this here today. I think that an experienced politician should have dealt with things in a timely manner. If this had been done previously, we would not even be debating this. We would have moved on last Wednesday.

Mr. Speaker, I am particularly concerned by the campaign nature of this whole process. I have a package of letters of support for the Premier on Friday. I do not know what we said to people to ask them to send those letters in, but I picked one and I called the author to see if they read the Report of the Special Committee on Conflict Process. The answer was no. I am troubled by that because the Premier's response to the report is, to my mind, the only reason this motion is before us today. I wonder if these demonstrations of support are being made without everyone having all the background.

There have been too, Mr. Speaker, a number of people who have expressed concern about the process that we have set for ourselves on Wednesday in the Territorial Leadership Committee. I have to say that I have no problem with a secret ballot in the Territorial Leadership Committee. We elected the Premier and the Ministers by secret ballot. In fact, when the idea of a vote by a show of hands was floated when we first got together, there was almost no support for that. If memory serves me right, even Mr. Ootes opposed it, even though last Friday he appeared to have changed his position.

So why should we have a secret ballot? Mr. Speaker, the process lost by the Premier is just one reason. I have heard from several Members that they feel threatened by some of the letters and calls that they have received. The Premier himself has said, "If somebody is going to take a stick to you and say, stay and do what I ask or I am going to club you, I am not going to react very well." No Premier in this country should be subject to that. Mr. Speaker, no Member in this House should be subject to that.

To avoid just that feeling, Mr. Speaker, one of the basic tenants of a democracy is a vote by secret ballot for our leaders. No matter how the vote goes today, I still want to see that secret ballot and confirmation on Wednesday.

Mr. Speaker, I want to make it perfectly clear that I have no desire to bring down the government. I do not see that as being productive. I really regret that we are here today talking about this motion. What should have been a minor issue and easily dealt with has now snowballed to this point.

So, Mr. Speaker, I want to make it clear that I will not vote against the motion, but I also want to make it clear that the actions of the Premier in the last week would be the only reason I am considering abstaining from the vote. It is important to our credibility that we be seen to be getting on with business.

So today, Mr. Speaker, if I vote in favour of this motion, it is because I want the government to move on and get past this issue. The issue should not have gotten this far in the first place.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that I hope the Premier will not use this destabilizing method every time he thinks someone is being critical of a government position. I will continue to support the vast majority of government actions, but I will always reserve my right to be critical when I think it is warranted. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.