Yes, Mr. Chair.
The amendment is to page 81 of Bill C-44.
First of all, the amendment defines the mandate of the parliamentary budget officer, who will be able to provide, on his or her own initiative, independent analyses of the topics mentioned previously.
In addition, the amendment states that the reports are not an exhaustive list and that the PBO may prepare other types of reports.
The amendment also removes a provision which alluded to the approval of the Speakers of the two Houses, a change that is extremely important to us.
The amendment also specifies that members may directly submit to the PBO requests on the financial cost of any proposal that relates to any matter over which Parliament has jurisdiction, rather than strictly requests concerning measures the member is considering submitting to the House or the Senate.
It was made clear in discussions with witnesses that appeared before this committee that because of the wording of Bill C-44 with regard to the changes concerning the position of parliamentary budget officer, it would be more difficult for members and senators to submit requests to him regarding studies or cost assessments. Amendment NDP-10 resolves this problem. Indeed, the wording of the bill is an issue, since it limits the power of MPs and senators—senators must be included in the conversation—to submit requests to the PBO. The problem has been pointed out. This amendment aims to ensure that parliamentarians may make requests on any topic they have in mind without this being necessarily directly related to a measure they intend to propose.
With regard to my friendly amendment, I repeated the statements the PBO himself made in his draft bill.
I hope to obtain the support of my colleagues so that the mandate of the PBO can be broadened as much as possible, and so that members and senators may submit requests to him on a range of topics. The idea here is to not limit the requests members and senators could submit to him.