Thank you very much, Madam Chair and Mr. Minister, and all those who have come today. I appreciate the opportunity to pose a couple of questions.
I wanted to start off, if I could, with the notion of a public service commissioner and this notion of Gwyn Morgan being rejected by the committee. I can say that just as the Prime Minister was disappointed in the decision of this committee, it would be fair to say that I was disappointed in the results of the election. The democratic processes are democratic processes, and one recognizes that you don't always get what you want through those processes but you respect them.
The question at the end of the day is what is the view with respect to committees then, in a broader sense? I mean, if a committee strikes down a particular recommendation and says democratically, through multiple parties, that a certain individual is not who the committee thinks is right for the position, is it then standard practice to not care what the committee's position is and to appoint somebody else?
I'm trying to understand the logic for it. I understand that he was disappointed. He was a friend and somebody he had a long-standing relationship with. I'm sure he wanted him there. But through a democratic process, the committee said no, and then to simply eliminate the position because you didn't get the person you wanted.... I'm trying to understand the logic of that. Is it not more important to work with the committee and find somebody who can build consensus?