Madam Speaker, the hon. member for Dewdney Alouette worries because the lawyer representing the RCMP Public Complaints Commission at the APEC hearings attended a fundraising dinner in Vancouver.
I cannot understand how such a question could be raised in the House. Unless my colleague does not understand the first thing about the legislation as it stands and its mechanisms. This matter has strictly nothing to do with the government.
I will explain for the umpteenth time, in the hope that the message will get across a little bit better this time.
The complaints commission was established in 1986 to investigate complaints made by the public against members of the RCMP.
Under the 1986 legislation, the commission is an independent administrative tribunal. It conducts investigations as it deems appropriate and is accountable for its practices and procedures. It is operating at arm's length from the government. That fact should be emphasized and repeated again, and I would repeat it in 15 different languages if I could: the commission is operating at arm's length from the government.
In the APEC hearings, the chairperson of the commission appointed Mr. Ted Hughes to deal specifically with the events that took place in Vancouver.
Mr. Hughes has a great reputation as an experienced lawyer and, under his direction, the hearings have made considerable progress. To date, more than 60 witnesses have been heard. I think Mr. Hughes has given all possible assurances that his work is absolutely honest and beyond reproach. In fact, that in itself is the best guarantee that the Canadian public will know exactly what happened at the APEC summit.
In performing his duties, Mr. Hughes recruited Mr. Marvin Storrow, who is the lawyer in question; he attended a fundraising dinner and has resigned, not to bring the work he was doing into disrepute.
The commission has nothing to do—