Discussion · Government Orders
Martin Champoux Bloc Québécois
“I worry this bill lets the government avoid blame for defense spending decisions. The new agency's president is close to the Prime Minister and will make about $700,000 a year, which is more than the Prime Minister makes. If there are scandals or bad decisions, the government could just blame this agency. The government needs to stay directly in charge of defense investments.”
“Madam Speaker, is this not a way for the government to shirk some of its responsibility? Is it not a bit risky to create an agency to handle such crucial and sensitive defence investments? Questions are already being raised. First, there is the appointment of the agency’s president, who is close to the Prime Minister and has a background at Goldman Sachs. Then, that person’s salary is around $700,000 a year, which is more than that of most senior public servants. That is more than what the Minister of Finance and National Revenue himself earns, and it is more than the Prime Minister’s salary, though interest on his investments is not included in that figure. I wonder if this is a way for the government to offload some of its responsibility. When there are questionable decisions, when there are suspicions of misconduct or scandals, which could happen, even if it is just cases of misconduct that need to be investigated, the government might then be able to claim that it was not them, that it was the agency, and that it cannot be held responsible. On the contrary, when it comes to defence investments, it is absolutely essential for the government to be at the helm.”
Madam Speaker, is this not a way for the government to shirk some of its responsibility? Is it not a bit risky to create an agency to handle such crucial and sensitive defence investments? Questions are already being raised. First, there is the appointment of the agency’s president, who is close to the Prime Minister and has a background at Goldman Sachs. Then, that person’s salary is around $700,000 a year, which is more than that of most senior public servants. That is more than what the Minister of Finance and National Revenue himself earns, and it is more than the Prime Minister’s salary, though interest on his investments is not included in that figure. I wonder if this is a way for the government to offload some of its responsibility. When there are questionable decisions, when there are suspicions of misconduct or scandals, which could happen, even if it is just cases of misconduct that need to be investigated, the government might then be able to claim that it was not them, that it was the agency, and that it cannot be held responsible. On the contrary, when it comes to defence investments, it is absolutely essential for the government to be at the helm.