Just further to Mr. Murphy's comments, we find that whenever there is either a new member and/or a replacement member who does not necessarily understand the role of public accounts, we can sometimes shift towards more partisan issues. This is why I personally believe the committee would work better if we had members in the respective parties who were firmly entrenched with the responsibilities of accountability and oversight and who clearly understood their role as one that clearly demonstrated the faith and the confidence in the authenticity of government, rather than simply the partisan role, which is normal in a democracy.
We've seen that over a number of occasions. I can honestly say the majority of our members here on this committee, and people I've been associated with in the past, have handled the responsibilities of this committee very well. It's only occasionally when a member comes in, in a fill-in role, that they think of it as following the normal operation of the committee they're on. The public accounts committee works totally differently from any other committee on the Hill. That is why it just takes a little bit of understanding and moving it forward.
If we can pass that message along to more and more parliamentarians, then I think we will probably have a more effective committee of public accounts.