Thank you very much.
Mr. Lagueux, thank you for your presentation. You've made ten recommendations to the committee.
In terms of how I and Canadians see the role of members of Parliament, I think it would certainly be to address the issue of accountability to the government in power, to ask questions, and to ensure taxpayers get the best bang for their bucks, as my colleague Mr. Bachand said.
When we look at military procurement and it appears to be a sole-source contract, of course, MPs and the Canadian public become nervous, with some justification.
You said you disagreed with Mr. Alan Williams, who appeared at our committee and who's written a book called Reinventing Canadian Defence Procurement. On one of the recommendations Mr. Williams made, you said you disagreed with his recommending a different process or a different kind of department. One of the recommendations Mr. Williams made was that a lead minister should be designated for defence procurement.
I'm relatively new to this committee. I've only been on it for a year. One of the things that has been very stark to me on the committee is to have a variety of ministers and deputy ministers come before the committee. When I and others have asked specific questions about the procurement process, we get the answer that we should ask the question of the other minister coming the next week or that it doesn't fall under.... It's been very difficult to pin down which minister has specific accountability in this process, and I find it very frustrating.
I'm going to ask you this. Why would you be or are you opposed to the recommendation that one minister should have final accountability on the process?