Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I concur with my colleague on the points he raised on this. In looking at both documents that were tabled at the time that the Federal Accountability Act was introduced--one being the draft bill and the other being the discussion paper--and having looked at this for the first time, I note that by the information commissioner's own admission there have not been public consultations on this. I think this committee, and I'm sure the House, would benefit from that.
I also recognize that the motion in its wording is essentially non-binding on the minister, in terms of considering the advisability. Certainly we may get to a point at which we may want to look at something along that line, but I don't see the need at this point, in terms of imposing a deadline on this committee's work, of getting to that point and setting that time in front of us by the adjournment date.
The other point I have some real interest in, having looked at the discussion paper, is the cost implications. There is no question that we need to consider the kinds of amendments that need to be made to the proposed act--that's very clear--but it also carries, at first glance, a significant implication in terms of the cost and operations of government that I would like, as a committee member, to hear more about before we move ahead with that type of discussion.