Mr. Speaker, the member for Repentigny is an experienced parliamentarian and a skilled debater. I do not find very much in his speech that I would disagree with.
Canadians would want us to say as a matter of principle that where Canadian taxpayers' dollars were involved there should be an accountability and reportability mechanism. Therefore, I do not know whether or not there is any reason not to support the motion.
The member however talked about the independence a lot of foundations would have and he somehow suggested that since the board of directors get to pick the auditing firm that there may be a problem.
Just to protect my profession, I want to remind the member that the auditing and accounting profession is guided by the professional practices of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants through the handbook. It makes its business based on its word and its credibility. Without that credibility, it is out of business.
Having said that, my question for the member has to do with how we get to the point which he has raised so well about how we keep in touch with the foundations on their performance. The Auditor General herself does not even look at every department every year. She reports on selected ones and over a series of years we might have a full cycle.
However, the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates has assigned to it the responsibility for reviewing these foundations as part of the overall estimates process each and every year.
I wonder if the member would concede that it is not just simply sufficient to rely on the Auditor General to do all things for us, that in fact members of Parliament, through the committees and their other work, also have a responsibility to look diligently at the operations of foundations.