Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all the witnesses who came to see us today to give their opinions.
I will not have time, of course, to put questions to everyone, but I have taken good note of the recommendations. The amendments proposed to improve the bill are of particular interest to the committee.
Ms. St-Onge and Mr. Tremblay, my colleague just mentioned the fact that witnesses from the department unfortunately did not have many answers to give us as to what to do next.
Earlier, I was wondering about the advisability of giving the government a blank cheque. Essentially, the government would be given full latitude to determine what happens next; that leeway would be given to the independent committee, the entity, to use the term used in the bill. It would be up to that entity to make the ultimate decision. Of course, we are faced with a dilemma, which has been explained by Mr. Furey: ultimately, someone has to make a decision.
In the case of tax credits, among other things, it is generally the Minister of National Revenue who ultimately assumes responsibility for them. For this reason, we decided to opt for some kind of entity; we would transfer this responsibility to someone else who would be, supposedly, independent.
Do you think there should be not only a certain transparency, but also an appeal mechanism, the possibility of recourse in the event of a refusal by the government, with regard to the decision made about the eligibility of a journalistic organization?