Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The Chair is having some difficulty in determining whether this is a point of order to a matter that has occurred within the House as far as the procedure is concerned. This matter deals with a conversation that took place outside of the House and may not have had any effect on the procedures within the House.

I do not believe that the Member has a point of order at this time. I am going to refer to a quotation from Beauchesne's 6th Edition Parliamentary Rules, on acceptance of the word of a Member, under section 494:

It has been formally ruled by Speakers that statements by Members respecting themselves and particularly within their own knowledge must be accepted. It is not unparliamentary temperately to criticize statements made by Members as being contrary to the facts. That no imputation of intentional falsehood is permissible. On rare occasions, this may result in the House having to accept two contradictory accounts of the same incident.

I am going to ask the Minister if he wishes to comment on that. He may do so only if he chooses to. If he does not choose to, he does not need to. The honourable Minister responsible for the Financial Management Board, Mr. Handley.