I'm absolutely 100% clear that it's to Parliament through one of these committees. There's no doubt about it: this is the only way the ombudsman can freely do this difficult job.
I want to also say that everyone is of good faith. I have no doubt that this current minister is of good faith. The point is that it's not about personalities, it's about creating an infrastructure for you to do your job properly.
The minister relies on his senior bureaucrats to give advice in order to make decisions. One of them who testified here on June 1 told you that the term “ombudsman” has yet to be defined. Well, excuse me, it has been defined. Second, you were told that it would be contrary to law to have the ombudsman oversee the veterans pension appeal board. Again, that is mistaken.
Coming back to the ombudsman and the reporting relationship, they must report to a committee, and that's in order to be free of bureaucratic interference, not just political interference. Can you imagine if this committee had the resources of an ombudsman to follow up the things you hear through your testimony? Wouldn't that be a valuable commodity for this impartial committee? I think it would very much strengthen your committee work. So that's another function the ombudsman can have.