I'll just say quickly that I agree with Mr. Chambers. I think it would be a sign of goodwill for the minister to appear outside the context of studies of her own legislation and to respond to the committee's long-standing invitation to appear. That was in the context of the inflation study. I think that is the extent of the invitation. I express my support for that.
This may be part of what Mr. Chambers is driving at in terms of subcommittee meetings. I think there needs to be some discussion of the letter that we would send to other committees if we wanted to have a process that involved their areas of expertise. I'm certainly concerned to see that happen soon. Perhaps that's a conversation we could have no later than Tuesday.
Again, to the point of having briefings quickly after tabling legislation, I think it would be nice to have an opportunity closer to the back end of the process to ask questions to officials. I think we can ask better questions to officials once we've had the benefit of witness feedback.
All of that said, I'm prepared to support a prestudy. I think we've had this conversation around the table a couple of times now in this Parliament. Budget implementation acts tend to be large bills. I think Canadians are well served when we take the time to study those well. I think we should start that study sooner rather than later. That's especially as we do—I hope we will—consult other committees on some of the content of that bill. I think it's good to get it going.
Thank you.