Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Gentlemen, I want to thank you once again for appearing today.
In this case, the lack of depth is one of the reasons we are somewhat reluctant with respect to this bill. Ms. Nash also discussed that. The Canadian Bar Association, in its letter dated September 14 regarding Bill C-28, says the following: “It is not clear whether the Financial Literacy Leader is intended to fulfill the role of the national leader recommended in the Financial Literacy Task Force Report.”
The Minister of State Finance was also asked some questions about the recommendations made by the task force, on the one hand, and about the bill's content, on the other hand. What came to light was that the leader had the possibility or the option to follow those recommendations, but that was not really set out in writing.
In addition, the Canadian Bar Association pointed out that the bill is not specific enough. It said the following: “[...] it is difficult to see how the activities of the Financial Literacy Leader could be evaluated. Too much generality can lead to unfocussed activity.”
I am sure you have read the second recommendation, which talks about an advisory council that would make a broader approach possible.
I think you said, Mr. Rabbior, that this report has been available for a long time. It has taken a long time for us to get to the first stage. We have indicated our willingness by strongly supporting the motion moved by Mr. Rajotte, as we feel that this is very important in terms of financial literacy. What we want is an applicable system that would work quickly to really tackle the problem.
Could you tell us about how the leader's role could be judged or evaluated? What would be the way to do so? Was the second recommendation a good one in terms of that? Do you want me to read the recommendation?