Hi there, I have a few remaining concerns with the draft Bill: 1) s. 11(1)(c) and (e) refer to subjective grounds for removing members from the Council (incapacity and lack of fitness). Who will decide on this? One idea would be a 2/3 vote of other Council members. 2) s. 12 provides for the Council to receive 'reasonable' remuneration. I would suggest that this be linked to benefits provided to an existing position (eg Human Rights Commission or something along those lines). The same point applies to s. 26 for members of the Complaints Commission. 3) s.19(d) provides for the Council to receive funds from levies and fees that is imposes. This is not inappropriate as long as the level of those fees is set by another body. Unfortunately this is not the case, since s. 20 allows the fees to be set by the Council (ie it can determine its own revenues through fees imposed on the media). 4) s. 23 provides for annual accounts. The Council should also be required to produce an annual report on its activities. 5) s. 36(1) refers to a number of vague obligations on the media. It is not appropriate to require the media by law to inform the public (although this is of course a professional obligation). Otherwise, these obligations should be part of a code of conduct, generated in close consultation with the media and other stakeholders, rather than directly in the law. Best, Toby ___________________________________ Toby Mendel Centre for Law and Democracy toby@law-democracy.org Tel: +1 902 431-3688 Fax: +1 902 431-3689 www.law-democracy.org