I don't want to be upset with you; you have to work for the Conservative government—my deep sympathies there. But when the minister came here, he told us clearly that these were wasteful programs, that this is bureaucratically heavy.
I was actually thinking that we'd find out, and yet you come here and give us a six-year-old report and tell us that everything else is classified—sacrosanct, you said. Sacrosanct means nothing, if you cannot justify on paper why a minister told this committee that this was a bureaucratic, wasteful program, andyet you come in here and tell us it's the Cuban missile crisis, that these are secrets.
There's nothing secretive about producing clear evidence to a committee to say yes, look—what does it say here in the informative report...?
Excuse me; this is a very old report, but it's all you gave us.
It says how Trade Routes is positive, “providing substantial and necessary support for the growth of the arts”; that it's “a flexible program”, that it was “market-driven”. These are the reports you gave us, and then you tell us you can't talk about anything else.
Do you have anything to justify this program's having been cut, anything at all to show us?