Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Mr. Page, I'm going to quote from the Federal Accountability Act, provisions that I'm quite sure you're very familiar with, section 16.4, and this relates to the accountability of accounting officers within the framework of ministerial accountability. It reads:
Within the framework of the appropriate minister's responsibilities and his or her accountability to Parliament, and subject to the appropriate minister's management and direction of his or her department, the accounting officer of [the relevant department] is accountable before the appropriate committees of the Senate and the House of Commons for (a) the measures taken to organize the resources of the department to deliver departmental programs in compliance with government policies and procedures; (b) the measures taken to maintain effective systems of internal control in the department; (c) the signing of the accounts that are required to be kept for the preparation of the Public Accounts pursuant to section 64...
I had a fourth one, but I actually don't need it because I think it speaks for itself.
Given your past history in various senior positions in the government, I have two questions.
First, given those responsibilities of individuals within the government, how is it possible that there is not in fact significant detail on all of these expenditures and all of the processes within these departments? The second part of the question is, how is it possible that there isn't that detail that would be collected and overseen by this obligation?
Secondly, it begs the question of why that information hasn't been provided to you. I would also ask, given those responsibilities and those obligations under the law of the civil servants who are involved in these various project departments and in efforts to get this money out--and we heard from Madame Bourgeois about a certain suggestion that the instructions to prevent the disclosure of information came from relatively on high--what position does that put those civil servants in, when they know their obligations are in fact ultimately to this standing committee, for example, and yet they are being asked by...it sounds like political masters, not to do so?