I've looked at the mandate from the Parliamentary Budget Office and the officer. I don't know what comments you want him to make on the unemployment rate. The Parliamentary Budget Officer is to review two things, in my view, based on what the input is. One is the government's budget and at the end of the day whether it's accurate or not. Two, if I propose something at a committee that we're going to change something, they look at it and tell us what it's going to cost, because I don't know off the top of my head or I don't have the research abilities to do it.
The unemployment rate is not set by us. It's not done by us. He could say, yes, the unemployment rate is 8.4%, 7.3%, or 9.2%. Is he going to comment on Statistics Canada's ability to determine whether that employment rate is correct or not? It's not government setting that. We're looking at an assessment of economic projections based on the federal government's projections and the federal government's revenues and expenditures based on our projections and actuals. I'm assuming that's it, Mr. McCallum.
I have no problem with Mr. McCallum's motion, but I do have an issue with throwing the unemployment rate in there. No offence—you can do it in a different motion, but in this piece it doesn't fit the mandate of what the officer does or what value-add they can offer by commenting on whether it's accurate or not. I don't see the value-add for the committee.