I commented myself, I think, in the first year I was in office that paragraphs 3(d) and (e), which talk about encouraging experienced and competent persons, is to be noticed. There is a balance to be struck. The observation I would make is that there's nothing else, pretty well, on the face of this entire act that supports those two principles. That isn't to say that they're not important principles. It's kind of in that context that I've made comments in the past, questioning whether our divestment provisions are too stringent, and that sort of thing. But I have taken note of paragraphs 3(d) and (e), and I agree that it's right there on the face of the act, and it's one of the balancing considerations when one appoints people to be public office holders.
On October 26th, 2010. See this statement in context.