Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a point of order respecting Tabled Documents 69, 70 and 71 tabled by Ms. Lee and Tabled Document 78 tabled by the Premier today. The rules state that any Member may provide the House any document which is required to be tabled by statute or which may be in public interest. On review of these documents, I am unable to ascertain how they are in public interest and the Members purporting that the tabled documents must, in my view, Mr. Speaker, must be able to establish in what fashion these documents are in the public interest, as they are certainly not documents which are required to be tabled by an enactment or a statute.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, I have a grave concern that with the tabling of these documents, of whether these are of legally protected or solicitor-client privileged documents. In reviewing these documents, Mr. Speaker, they clearly were prepared to contradict or influence the debate on the report of the Special Committee on Conflict Process. It appears to me that these documents could be detrimental to the interest of the government as a whole.

I am not completely familiar with what type of documents are permitted to be tabled in this House. My concern is that at least three of these documents may be documents resulting from the legal advice obtained or authorized by Cabinet. Are these Cabinet documents? Are they privileged documents? If they are privileged and that solicitor-client privilege has not been waived, are all legal opinions provided to this government on this matter now available to anyone who may request them? Did the Member for Range Lake have the appropriate permission from the clients to release these documents? Were they aware of the potential consequences to this government as a whole?

Mr. Speaker, my point of order is how is the public interest advanced by these documents and whether these types of documents, in these circumstances, are documents which can be properly tabled in this Legislature. Thank you.