Thank you very much for coming.
I'm looking at a couple of things. One is part III of the estimates: plans and priorities. I notice what seems to be a contradiction. On page 39, under “Program Activity Descriptions”, under 4(b), the heading reads: “Canadians understand the impacts of climate change and adapt to its effects.” Then the next couple of pages are a fairly graphic description of the sorts of challenges Canadians are facing, particularly in the north. And there's a call there for more resources for adaptation and for dealing with impacts.
If I then look at the four strategic outcomes of the department and their associated expenditures, I come to the fourth strategic outcome, which is, “The impacts of climate change on Canada are reduced.” And I see that we're spending only 2.5% of the program budget of the department. There seems to be a dissonance, if I may say so, between the declared strategic outcome.... Everything else gets about a third of the funding. Natural capital, weather and environment predictions, and effects of pollution and waste each get over 30% of the funding. Yet the big one, the very big one, which you properly describe on pages 39 and 40 of section 3, gets only 2.5%, and indeed on page 42, you seem to have pretty much put out of business the Canada Emission Reductions Incentive Agency. Can you help us with this contradiction?