Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, gentlemen.
I'm replacing someone on this committee, but I have to say that what I'm hearing is very disturbing. I'm going to be honest: I don't know if the others are used to it, but what you've just said really gets my goat. In my opinion, the Parliamentary Budget Officer must be independent and non-partisan.
As you said, this request came from the Prime Minister. You are asking this officer of Parliament to send his work plan to the two speakers, who also have a political affiliation. For independence, we will go back. I don't know if you realize how dangerous this game is to everyone.
Elections Canada is already doing its job when we are campaigning. So why mix an officer of Parliament into the electoral process and ask all parties to provide him with their platform? When we are in an election campaign, we are not sitting in Parliament; we are candidates for a upcoming election.
Why is the bill written this way? Why are you handcuffing the Parliamentary Budget Officer this way? Without realizing it, you just handcuffed this officer of Parliament by asking him to be accountable to people of a political affiliation. I'm talking about political affiliation, whatever it is. I think that's unacceptable. These people are appointed to be independent and free from any form of pressure from one party or another. I am not attacking the Liberal Party. I find that unacceptable, and I will always find that unacceptable. The fact that it is being introduced this way, in a budget bill, bothers me. I don't know whose idea it was. You said it was a request from the Prime Minister, but other people around you were thinking about it.
We have come to interfere in deeply apolitical and independent positions. Could you explain to me how it is that this person has to provide his work plan to the speakers of the House and the Senate, both of whom have a political affiliation, no matter which party they belong to? How will this person be independent?