Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The discussion about this capital plan that’s before the House has now turned directly to a line of

questioning about the credibility of a Member of Cabinet and the process. Questions about the conflict of interest process letters are better held at another table if we’re going to go and see an overall piece. That’s the Legislative Assembly as a whole, not just Cabinet, who would deal with that piece of it.

I would say, Mr. Chairman, that again, with this line of questioning, under 23(i), I believe it is, the motive is being planted. I know the Member himself has stated that he’s not intending to do this, but by a line of questioning following other lines of questioning in this House, in a sense saying, where’s the information…. Well, all Members know the information was given. A full package was given to Members, so asking a question saying, “I don’t have it” is not correct. It’s there; it’s in front of Members. All Members of this Assembly have it.

Now, the process itself on this piece. Cabinet has gone out and sought that information, and we followed the process and the rules. Whether it’s a Member for the Dene, the Gwich’in or the Inuvialuit, it’s considered a broad class of citizen. That question has also been directed with.

Mr. Chairman, the fact is that this line of questioning is not following the capital plan itself. Thank you.