Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would reiterate again the clause that we’re changing, one term, that’s what the legislative proposal is, a term of changing in Section 27(3), changing from a person that is laid off to a person that’s affected by a layoff. This is the reason that we are here. In order to change this overall Public Service, which says “any position” to “vacant position,” we’d have to take this legislation to the union and we would have to consult and we would have to do further in-depth review of the Public Service Act.

What we’re doing here is changing one small clause. This is not part of what we’re trying to change. Also, it does limit, as the Member says, the government’s ability if we add the word vacant. It does limit our ability. It doesn’t say we don’t place layoff persons into vacant positions, it says any position.

What the change would do that’s being contemplated by the Members would change to vacant positions only. So it would eliminate any possibilities where an individual could be ready to retire and we’re looking to have another individual in the public service that has been affected by layoff be the successor, putting that person in. It eliminates our ability to transfer the knowledge from a person that may be leaving the public service through retirement or the various ways of attrition that occur in the public service.

So if we’re going to do this, then we must take this back to a consultation process and we would change the legislative proposal. We can’t make this change on the floor here today. Thank you.