Mr. Speaker, one thing seems rather obvious. I tend to be more forward-looking than fixated on the past. And when I look at the future, what I look for is value for money and equal opportunities for all, meaning that those who want a complete education should be able to get it.
I do hope that everyone here supports this principle and agrees that we must seek the best and most efficient means to reach this goal. At one point in history it was decided that the province was the most efficient level of government to manage education.
I am willing to believe that it is possible for Quebec and Ottawa to reach agreements; the Constitution, which says that education is an area of provincial jurisdiction, is supposed to be such an agreement.
Given this premise, I wonder what the federal government is trying to do with its millennium scholarships. Is it an agreement or an intrusion to gain visibility? It is making no bones about what this is all about. I heard the Prime Minister—not a backbencher, but the Prime Minister himself—say that what he was seeking was visibility. Therefore I have serious misgivings regarding the return on investment we will get out of this fund.
We are not against helping students, indeed we believe student assistance to be a basic principle. But what is at issue here is cost-effectiveness. Canadians and Quebeckers are taxed to the hilt and deserve the maximum return on their tax dollars.
Education is an investment. As I said before, with life expectancy constantly increasing, it is not uncommon for students to stay in university well into their mid- or late 20s. But today, people can no longer afford this.
That is my answer. I could go on for another hour, but I will try to restrain myself for the rest of the day.