Thank you.
It's good to see you again, Honourable Easter.
You have two questions. I'll address the first one and let my colleagues address the second one.
How can we make it workable and simple? I have a concrete example in my hand—a specialized business plan we provided to the renewal offices. One office says it's the best it has seen and the other rejects the plan. I go to Ottawa and say, “Give me a template of what you want to deliver and I'll deliver.” They tell me to go to appendix C, but appendix C is ambiguous.
If you're going to come out with a program, make it consistent across the country. Do you know that there are specialized business plans out there that were rejected because of spelling mistakes? When did these officers become grammatical coaches? I don't understand this process.
For my two bits about this, it's about consistency. Show us what you want us to deliver and the industry will respond by building the necessary components. We have an amazing online data system, as does MNP and many of the other firms in Canada. We just have to be shown what they want and we will respond and deliver it, but don't change the rules halfway through. One of the real frustrations right now is that the offices do not have similar criteria—and they can reject it. There's nobody else to go to. It's like they are God. If they reject it, you're done, period. That's a problem.
Thanks.