Yes. I have two last thoughts, in the time left.
Mr. McGuinty today brought a motion forward. The original intent, it seemed, when the former Liberal government made this commitment, was to have an independent commissioner, one who reported directly and was removed. We'll be making suggestions to bring that right into the review process of Bill C-30, the government's bill. We think this is potentially an effective tool.
I know you can't comment on that, it being policy. My question is this. Looking at some of the comments your organization, the Auditor General's office, made about the employment insurance account—that government is consistently taking too much in—I'll quote:
[To allow] the Account to accumulate a surplus beyond what could reasonably be spent for employment insurance purposes, given the existing benefit structure and allowing.... In our opinion, the government has not observed the intent of the Employment Insurance Act.
Where's the line? Where is the line between commenting on ineffective government spending, or promises made and not kept, and advocating for policy options, which in Ms. Gélinas' last report she commented on, saying on climate change that the government had not taken it seriously enough yet and needed to ramp it up? Where is that line?