Just in summary, for the sake of my colleague, Mr. Lee, I do regret that we haven't conducted ourselves in the manner we thought we would when we came here. Mr. Lee, as a witness, would have had the opportunity to accept whatever questions we had and possibly to have knocked them out of the park, if they were easy to answer, but he hasn't answered all the concerns we have to my satisfaction, and I'm going to recommend that we do convene again on this subject, calling witnesses such as the principals of this law firm, because we don't know exactly what Mr. Lee is doing for this law firm.
He says he hasn't accepted any money to lobby government. That doesn't explain the list of things this law firm is claiming Mr. Lee is doing. And let me be clear: it's wrong to accept any kind of reward, inducement, or payment for any service an MP normally offers. Yes, it's absolutely fine if Marlene Jennings advocates on behalf of a business in her...anywhere she wants really, but as soon as you list yourself as doing that for pay for commercial reasons, or any kind of inducement or reward whatsoever, it crosses a line we all should be aware of, and I think it is perfectly appropriate for this committee to be dealing with it.
I am not accusing Mr. Lee of anything. We haven't had an opportunity to question him on this matter, but you can accept how it's an appropriate matter for discussion, and when we get our regular members of the committee back, the Liberal Party seems to agree as well.