Yes, we do have conversations when we go out for coffee about what we think would be solutions. And we argue as much as, perhaps even more than, the House finance committee argues about what the direction could be.
But with respect, in terms of our legislative mandate in the act of Parliament—the advice and independent analysis on the economy, the nation's finances—we are very careful not to cross the line and provide a prescription on policy. We're happy to do costings, whether we're looking at programs like the Canada Pension Plan or military procurement, to give you an extra independent data point, which we think is a good thing in this environment.
But, sir, I don't think our mandate allows us--nor do I think we would ever be comfortable--to suggest policy prescriptions. We want to give you the richest planning framework possible.
That's why in the speech today, in addition to these five-year projections, we're giving analysis on the economy relative to trend. Is it cyclical? Is it structural? What is the risk based on our forecast errors over the past 16 years, and what does the longer-term look like? We want you to have this rich planning framework so you can actually debate the solutions the way you debate here.