Mr. Speaker, the committee that is being suggested certainly falls under the terms of reference of the public accounts committee. I too do not see the need for an additional committee in the House for that reason.
The hon. member has suggested some improvements which have already been made with the Auditor General's report. However no mention was made under the aboriginal economic development strategy. I would like his comments on this point.
The throne speech addressed three major programs with the aboriginal affairs department that would be undertaken. I noted in chapter 11 of the Auditor General's report there were significant observations made on previous programs by the previous government. I would not like the hon. member to respond by saying it was the previous government's fault. It is actually the administrative problems within those programs which are of concern to me.
I want to make one reference. For instance, the administration and the government could not demonstrate that after spending at least $900 million from the beginning of its implementation in 1989 to early 1993 the strategy's objectives were being met.
The essence of the Auditor General's report on aboriginal programs, in particular the aboriginal economic development strategy, is that a lot of money is put into these programs but we really do not know what the outcomes of these programs are. They are poorly co-ordinated. In fact many Canadians think we are throwing out too much money without outcomes.
What is this government going to do when it introduces these new programs as announced in the throne speech? How are we going to have outcomes to these programs unlike the problem the Auditor General came up with in a previous report?