I've had a lot of experience with this stuff. A number of years ago I did a paper for the Auditor General--I don't know whether she would share it with you--on the subject of quality information for parliamentarians. The problem is there are 308 of you. I don't mean that you're a problem because there are 308 of you, but because you've all got different interests. One type of information or one way of presenting information may be suitable for your interests and your way of doing analysis and asking questions, but may not be suitable for some other member.
I think there may be something to be said for having a committee on public spending, which is a joint committee of the House of Commons and the Senate. I've done work for the Senate, and though it is a much maligned and ridiculed institution, it does far more good work than it's given credit for, largely through its committees conducting investigations. They are, in effect, evaluations of departments and programs. Because senators don't have the pressures of time, and don't have the re-election concerns, they do some very useful work that doesn't get much publicity but that nonetheless has an impact on the thinking of departments.
If I were designing something, I might think about a joint committee with a small dedicated group of MPs working alongside senators, and with a significant staff capability to tackle this really tough job of understanding what government finances are like, how spending operates, and so on.