Your honour,

It is my feeling that when dealing with this matter it would be appropriate to weigh the burdens involved heavily towards the Chair. Should the Chair determine that someone should no longer be a Legislator, but fail to effect such a change, then it would be unjust to penalise the member so effected. If a member has reason to believe they are a Legislator, and is acting as such in a good faith manner, then it would be perverse to rule otherwise; this would constitute a significant harm to the member, through no fault of their own, especially if the activity of said member during this period would be such to now maintain their Legislator status.

I see no good cause for the Chair, having determined that a member no longer qualifies for Legislator status, to delay the implementation of this change and relevant notifications beyond such time as needed for the administration of this.

To create a situation where a member may believe that they are a legislator and be acting as such for days or weeks, only to be told that they weren't and that their activities as such are now invalid, seems to be an absurd situation; if due to administrative negligence or failings on the part of the Chair a member should have lost Legislator status prior to discovery of such, I do not believe it would be just or sensible to backdate such; should that member still not meet compliance requirements then it would be logical to end their Legislator status at this point, but if they have returned to compliance I see no reason for them to face penalties.

Broadly speaking, where an error occurs due to governmental mistake then the member in question should not face undue consequences for that which was not their fault.