I'll be quick.
First, Mr. Chair, I would like to remind you that we asked the deputy minister to give us the rules that define a government slogan versus a slogan used in an election campaign. We received a response two or three weeks later, and I checked. Seriously, let's face it. Changing a comma or a word after “Canada strong” is a stretch. I suspect that the communications team was instructed to use this as a template and to come up with a convoluted way to comply with the rules. That's what happened during the election campaign. I think that this is the message that sticks in people's minds. Just ask a neurolinguistic programming expert or marketing professionals. The rule should be reassessed because the message was clear. There was an onslaught of messages that could influence future voters to think “Canada strong”. I'm absolutely flabbergasted.
I would like to talk about major projects. We've asked many questions and we haven't received any answers. I want to know who will sit on the board of directors and about the decision‑making process. As a person responsible for the second opposition party, I want to ensure that the process is ethical and thorough. I'm worried that one project will be arbitrarily chosen over another. We've often seen Quebec get sidelined. So please give me all the reassurance that I need, because I'm really worried.