Mr. Speaker, the member was not actually posing a question to me but responding to a matter that occurred earlier this day in the House. I want to comment briefly also on the auditor general who appeared before the environment committee as a witness during our deliberations on this important matter.
It is worth stressing, as the member for Davenport did yesterday, that even the auditor general indicated to the committee that it was beyond the scope of his office to do some of the things the government is now asking his office to do. The auditor general's office is one that functions as an auditor of government programs. The audit can only occur on matters that have already been set out as objectives of the government. If the government's objectives are wrong, the auditor general is not in any position to comment on that. Obviously those rules would apply to any desk or any worker within that office including the new commissioner of the environment.
It is quite possible that the auditor general's response to Bill C-83 will be that he is willing to take on the task before him, but we must bear in mind that some of the mandate which he has been given goes beyond the realm of what his office is capable of doing.
It is important to recognize in reviewing Bill C-83 that the auditor general performs a valuable function, but to ensure sustainability we need to go beyond the office of the auditor general. The Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development last year supported the view that we need something over and above the role which an auditor general can perform. I am surprised that members of the environment committee have not defended their own report.