I realize that it is your personal opinion. If the ombudsman were appointed by the members of the House of Commons for six years, two-thirds of the members could decide whether to keep him or not and not the government or the minister of the day.
Personally, I think it would be much better for veterans if he were appointed by two-thirds of members of Parliament. He would be sure of having a six-year term that way.
We met with Mr. Marin the other day; he told us that there were 25,000 complaints a year in Ontario. He has a $9.6 million budget and is accountable to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. I do not see why it would be different here. I would find it marvellous, because veterans would be better protected then if the ombudsman reported to the minister. If there is another minister and that minister does not agree with the ombudsman, he may not listen to him and choose to disregard him. If the ombudsman were accountable to the House of Commons, I presume that he would be well supported.
As I recall, the last time we studied the new Canada’s Veterans Charter—as you said earlier, it wasn’t perfect, I agree with you—it was carried by unanimous consent of the House of Commons in 2004. Members in all political parties were in agreement.
This means that veterans are much better protected by the House of Commons than by a minister.
I gave you my opinion. I have nothing against ministers. They do good work, but they have to toe the party line and make decisions based on their election platform and their mandate. That is why I do not agree that the ombudsman should report to the minister.