All right. I was looking at amendment NDP-22 when I was leaning in that direction. I'll give you the reasons why, and then I just want a comment from Mr. O'Sullivan, if I could.
I agree with my colleague here. I do not believe that with the Liberal amendment, the Public Service Employment Act is the right way to go. I'm sensing that an independent commission should be struck to deal with that.
The major problem I have with the Bloc amendment, even though the spirit is similar, is the fact that it would go to a standing committee of the House that would, frankly, review some 3,000 appointments a year, including the judiciary.
There is, number one, great potential to become politicized in a hurry in that process. As well, there are just some logistical concerns I would have. What happens if they hire some folks and then have to fire them? Would you go back to the committee to deal with that? It just seems to be a little untenable to me.
However, on the audit function--and that's my primary question--Ms. Jennings was saying that where the Liberal amendment is perhaps more suited than the other two amendments is that they have this audit function in there.
I notice that the NDP motion also has an audit function built into it. However, the Bloc's does not. I would just like to hear Mr. O'Sullivan's interpretation on the audit function itself and the importance it could have to this type of process.