Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I will start with you, Mr. Hickey, because I didn't have the chance to speak with you, or to hear your presentation.
In its technical aspects, it is understood by all that the bill is not controversial. There is however another issue to take into account. Questions were asked about the process.
I'll say it in English. Before you came in there was a notice of motion presented to us by the Conservative side that the finance department provide an annual update to the finance committee on the status of all outstanding technical tax changes in an effort to ensure regular and timely legislation, as already committed to by the Conservative government.
You might not know about process in government, but this actually is only applied until prorogation. It won't survive the next prorogation. Basically, what we have here is something that's only good until we have a new Parliament.
This being said, we have a problem with the process right now, and things being as they are with the finance committee, this is likely the only opportunity we have to discuss the process surrounding the presentation of those technical tax bills. The last one was over 10 years ago. We don't know when the next one will be coming. I understand there are about 200 changes left to implement or to present in the bill.
Mr. Hickey, do you think we would be remiss in our role as parliamentarians to miss this opportunity to address this sensitive question of process, and how the changes are represented in a timely fashion?