Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'll summarize the conversation.
Ms. Auguste, we seem to be in a political communication film right now. I haven't heard you say what new things your bill would bring to the table that couldn't be done today by the Meteorological Service of Canada. What needs does it meet?
We aren't against the principle. On the contrary, we're saying that the government isn't doing enough, that it isn't taking the climate crisis seriously, that it's fuelling this crisis with pipelines and that it has an insufficient adaptation plan with a reduced budget. However, we don't want new structures for the sake of new structures. The Prime Minister didn't pass a bill to build pipelines with Alberta, nor to develop an auto strategy that weakens the previous climate objectives. That's the challenge.
Our time here is nonetheless valuable. I don't see why you need a bill. What you need is to obtain money and to move forward with your concern.
I would like you to tell me exactly why this bill exists. If the issue isn't resources, it's a lack of money. We know this, and you should be allocating more. Your bill doesn't bring in any money. Since it's a private member's bill, it can't.
What are the current legal and administrative barriers preventing the government from improving the meteorological services provided in Canada? What are the concrete factors?