Thank you, Chair.
It is true that Madame Sinclair-Desgagné discussed this motion with us. It's not a topic that is unimportant. It was one that was the subject of a full meeting on an Auditor General's report. The Auditor General came back basically saying the job was done and she could not provide any further details to us. That's not out of the ordinary. The Auditor General, in her verification work, is often in a position where she's examining contracts and secure documents. That is why we have an independent Auditor General. She has access to those documents. She does the analysis and then she reports back to us.
Our role here in public accounts is to look at the reports of the Auditor General. My concern—and why I would have liked to have this meeting in camera, because I think it merits a full and frank discussion among the members here—is whether we are in the process now of undermining the role of the Auditor General. There is that issue.
The second thing is that we have a full calendar. We have a schedule already before us. We are expecting new reports to come in.
Our role is to study the work of the Auditor General. I know we have a minister coming in on indigenous affairs. Actually, if we are going to be stepping out of the box, I think that's the box I would like to be stepping out of. For all intents and purposes—and I disagree that lives are no longer at stake—we don't know the next thing that is coming. To undermine the ability to work in a commercially sensitive area, that's a discussion that may be appropriate to government operations. We have the good fortune to have Mr. McCauley here, who is the chair of OGGO and is certainly well versed in those kinds of discussions when we're talking about ongoing work.
I believe we had a fulsome discussion last week when the Auditor General and Health Canada and so on were here. For me, I think it's time to move on.