The public meeting was convened in the afternoon of July 12, 2001. Mr. Chivers, legal counsel for the Minister, was in attendance. Further faxed submissions were sent by counsel for the Conflict of Interest Commissioner respecting the issue of whether evidence should be called.

As a result of consideration of the various issues, and upon reviewing the submissions of counsel for the Conflict of Interest Commissioner and those of Mr. Chivers, the following decisions were made:

1. As the Speaker has exclusive authority respecting any contract for legal counsel for the Conflict of Interest Commissioner, this matter was referred back to him in the hope that it could be expeditiously resolved;
2. The special committee decided that it was necessary to hear evidence from witnesses to clarify certain issues and facts. In this regard, it directed that invitations to attend before the committee be issued to the Minister, the Conflict of Interest Commissioner, John Bayly, Wendy Morgan, Jack Rowe and Lee Selleck;
3. Mr. Chivers indicated his willingness to provide a transcript of the tape-recorded March 26, 2001 telephone conversation to the Law Clerk for provision to the lawyers for the Conflict of Interest Commissioner. It was directed that this transcript be so provided;
4. The special committee declined to have a copy of the transcript for its information as the admissibility of this material could be in issue. Committee members therefore, as at the date of this report, have not been provided with this transcript and are not privy to any information that it may contain;
5. Mr. Chivers did not press for any portion of the proceedings to be held in camera. The special committee therefore directed that proceedings would continue to be in public. If any application was made at a future point to go in camera, it would be assessed on the merits and reasons for that request;
6. The special committee directed that the Conflict of Interest Commissioner continue to hold her investigation report as originally directed by the Legislative Assembly in its June 12, 2001 motion;
7. The special committee indicated its wish to reconvene the public hearing July 24th to 26th, 2001 if it was granted an extended mandate from the Legislative Assembly and if witnesses and counsel were all available. It further directed that if these dates were not acceptable, that alternate dates be canvassed with all concerned; and
8. The special committee concluded that it would submit its report to the Legislative Assembly July 23, 2001, indicating that it was unable to conclude its tasks. A further extension of time would be sought to allow it to conduct the hearing and conclude its mandate.