MR BERGER
And finally Chairperson, my learned friend says that in relation to 31(4), he says that the law of privilege is not really applicable because the Section allows, I am trying to understand my learned friend's argument, it is a bit difficult to understand.  He says that the Section allows a person to be questioned.  In my submission, my learned friend's argument begs the question, the question is whether the Section 29 evidence was tendered without prejudice.  If the Section 29 evidence was tendered without prejudice, then it is privileged and then the Law of Privilege applies, so we go back to the starting point, what was the purpose of a Section 29 hearing?  We know that the Act is clear, the hearing is in camera and it is secret, for a certain period.  Does that mean, and that is I submit the question that the Committee must decide, does that mean that that evidence is tendered without prejudice?  If it doesn't mean that, then the Law of Privilege does not apply.  If that evidence was tendered without prejudice, then the question is has the witness waived that privilege, which attaches to the communication.  My submission is this committee will have to rule, with respect, on what was the status of the evidence when it was tendered at the Section 29 hearing.