Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to you, Mr. Minister, and to your officials for being here today.
I have a question on process, and I hope in the question time available a question on substance for Mr. Porter.
I'd like to read to you from something written by a tax lawyer at Thorsteinssons in my jurisdiction in British Columbia. Referring to the 900-page bill, Mr. McDonnell wrote:
This Bill will also be passed without much in the way of informed debate in the House. Most parliamentarians voting on it will admit that they have not read it, let alone tried to fully understand the consequences of voting for (or against) it. This is not how Parliament is supposed to deal with one of its essential functions—the raising of revenue. It’s sad to say it, but I don’t think most of our parliamentarians understand this aspect of the role of Parliament, or, if they do, have the courage to go to the wall in defending it.
Given that this has been one bill of almost 1,000 pages, do you see a better way forward so that parliamentarians can deal with the content of this bill?