Thank you, Chair, and again thank you to the witnesses for the really important dialogue that we're having. I'm going to make an observation and then I'll ask my question.
Mr. Baker, from the government side, talked about the importance of this process to make legislation better. There's been significant discussion about what the panel should look like. In this regard, I do want to note that the government did not wait to listen to our important reflections on what this panel should look like, and has already appointed it. That, of course, has diminished our opportunities to influence it, despite some of the good dialogue we have had on that.
We just had a comment made about our oil and gas sector. I'm going to use an example first and then I'll perhaps go to Ms. Joseph. The government has banned six plastics without doing any sort of analysis of the impact. You ask them what companies in Canada produce plastics, what's the impact going to be, do we import them, where do we get our straws from, and the government hasn't done any analysis of that. I think many of us agree it's important, but the analysis of the impact is also important.
Ms. Joseph talked about an economic analysis. I've heard many witnesses say that as we make this transition we're going to have lots of jobs—albeit just different ones. I don't know what the fear would be about having an economic analysis done that looks at that as part of this particular piece of legislation. We've talked about other sort of benchmarks.
I would open it up for you to perhaps comment on some of the things that have been said on oil and gas, but also on the importance of an economic analysis. If this transition creates more jobs, we should be transparent about it.
Could you go ahead, please.