Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I take it that we are speaking to the motion. Mr. Chairman, I will speak in favour of the motion.

The allegations and the apprehension of bias impacts all of us. I think the public in particular want to know that we are going to have an open and transparent system. Public and Members must have confidence in the office of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner in order to be seen as credible in doing her job.

Now the Minister has asked to withdraw her application. In so doing, she again restated her position that the Commissioner was biased. Had she withdrawn the position that there was bias, then perhaps this would be really over.

I have had countless people ask me what in the name of heaven was going on. I am afraid that I have not been able to answer very well. I have typically held out that when the special committee concluded its work, we would have a better idea of what the issue was.

I think we need to know. There is going to have to be some reckoning. The public has to have some understanding what has happened, why it has happened, and how this whole process has been worked out. I think that it is clear that it has demonstrated that there is some weaknesses in our legislation, and I think that it is going to be important that we find a way to repair that legislation so that we do not find ourselves in a similar situation again.

I am in favour of the committee continuing with its work. I know that Ms. Lee says that she has no confidence in the process unless she is involved. I thought it was interesting that Mr. Antoine basically proposed the answer there by pointing out that it is up to all Members of this Assembly to look after our own. So it is our responsibility as an Assembly as a whole to deal with issues like this. I think that we have to remember that we face a reality here. That reality is one of time. In this Legislature, it is our custom to delegate all of the issues that we consider.

For instance, we have three standing committees responsible for program areas. We have one standing committee responsible for rules. We have two special committees; one for languages and the other is on the sunset clause and self-government. On top of that, to look after our administrative issues, we have the Board of Management. So typically, all of the issues that we consider are delegated for consideration by committee. Why is that? It is because we would have to sit for 260 days a year if we were going to deal with everything through the committee of the whole process, which is the only way that we can do things and have 19 Members of the Legislative Assembly involved in things, to deal with issues on a free and equal basis.

It would be unlikely that we would be able to really do our jobs well if we were tied to sitting in here in meetings for five days a week, 52 weeks of the year.

Mr. Chairman I think that the members of the special committee have already waded through all of the information up to this point. I think that it is better to keep them working on something that they have developed some familiarity with, rather than moving it to another process at this point.

I have heard the comment that we could spend the money in much better ways. I have to say that I cannot disagree with that. Absolutely, we could spend the money better. I certainly regret that we have come to this point in this issue and that we are spending as much money as we are in this whole process.

Again, this comes back to how do we carry on? Could we send it to the Board of Management? It sounds like, from the Law Clerk's explanation, that there is a bit of a mandate problem there, but there is an even bigger problem and that is the Board of Management does not report to this Assembly.

As Mr. Antoine pointed out, it is important that the Members of this Assembly make the final decision on this issue. It is up to us to make the final decision, and it is only when recommendations come back to us from a committee that we have a chance to consider them and to make that final decision.

I do not think that all 19 of us have to sit around a table and hear all of the arguments all the time. I feel quite comfortable in delegating issues, whether it is to the Governance and Economic Development Committee or the Special Committee on Official Languages to come back and make recommendations, that I can then count on their expertise to provide us with the background information so that I can make informed opinions.

The other suggestion that I have heard is that we bring in a retired judge to carry on the process. I would argue whether this was kicked to the Board of Management or to a judge, the costs to bring this to conclusion are going to be the same. At this point, people have applied to bring in witnesses. They want to be heard. It is going to be an expensive process no matter how we bring this to resolution. However, I think we have to bring this to some resolution. It is not going to be easy and it is not going to be cheap. It is not going to cost us any more to have the special committee do it.

They do not get paid more for every day that they meet. Their costs are going to be the same. The costs that they would have for witnesses or for counsel and those costs are not going to be any different, whether it is a retired judge or the Board of Management or the special committee. So I say let's stick with the process that we have started, because I do want to see some resolution to this issue. I want it to come forward and I believe that the quickest way to do that is to ask the special committee to continue, to extend their mandate and ask them to continue their consideration of this issue and to bring it to a final report to this House for a debate. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.