Well, I've been on it for a long time.
I read your report several times. You made 19 good recommendations. I don't necessarily agree with all the recommendations, but the overriding concern, the broad brush, was to make some attempt to rebalance the relationship between Parliament and government.
Your 19th recommendation was for a response to be tabled in Parliament within two years, and that has not been done. I, like you, am disappointed, because the recommendations and the government's response should have been subject to debate in Parliament. They're under no obligation to accept them, and it's not your job to dictate to them, but there were some good recommendations there. Unfortunately, your report is now gathering dust on the bookshelves of Ottawa.
My question, sir, is on one of the responses. It is about your recommendation on the accountability of deputy ministers before committees, specifically the public accounts committee. The government did respond. Actually, I was satisfied with the response in that particular act: that deputy ministers are accountable to the appropriate ministers for the compliant and prudent financial administration of the departments, the establishment and maintenance of internal controls, and the signing off on accounts. I was fairly satisfied, but once the act was proclaimed, they interpreted it totally differently from what the act states, in that the deputy ministers are accountable only to their ministers and not to any committee in Parliament--not to Parliament at all.
The public accounts committee has adopted a protocol in line with your recommendation and in line with the actual wording of the act. I don't know if you're following that issue, but do you have any comment on that particular issue?