Mr. Speaker, I see that the hon. member has carefully avoided answering the very simple question I asked of him, that is, for what other departments does the CED—which acts as an agent, in fact—carry out its mandate. He does not know the answer and so he avoided answering. Does he not understand the implications of what he is proposing?
I remind him once again, furthermore, that the Canadian Constitution is extremely clear in terms of jurisdictions. He has the right to disagree with the Constitution, but not the right to be unfamiliar with it. Obviously, he does not know it very well, since section 36(1)( a) specifically enables the federal government to promote equal opportunities for the well-being of Canadians and 36(1)( b ) enables it to further economic development to reduce disparity in opportunities. This refers to the whole country.
Another thing—I would like to remind my colleague that his figures may indicate some research problems, for this very simple reason. Here are the investments we made during the year from April 1, 2003 to March 31, 2004, and I am speaking exclusively about the Lower St. Lawrence region to begin with. Of course, I have the figures for all the regions, and I can give him those too, as we go along. The Berger Group received $688,000; PCG Systèmes d'information, $578,000; AMH Canada, $212,000; Glendein, $468,000; Saint-Alexandre, $20,000; a numbered company $152,000; Océanova Biotechnologies, $3 million; Technopole maritime du Québec, which I have visited, by the way, $2 million; ISMER at the Université du Québec à Rimouski, $2 million. When I add up all these amounts that have been allocated, and I am talking about only one year, for all CED programs put together I get a total investment in that region of nearly $15 million. Just to be perfectly clear and use the most accurate numbers, it is exactly $14,814,612. The figures provided by the hon. member do not agree with mine. I have details and evidence, which he does not.