For all of that, I want to thank you, but I wonder if we could come back to the question of humouring me with a fixed budget date or period.
I'll give you an example. There's a lot of concern—New Democrats are very concerned, and that's why we're raising it in the House and at every available table—about cuts to Indigenous Services Canada. We've seen a lot of stories about cuts to Indigenous Services Canada coming. Part of that is based on a detailed look at the estimates. Of course, the estimates don't represent what may be coming in the budget, because we have misalignment.
To the extent that government may choose to renew some of the sunsetting funding but won't or can't announce that until the budget, it's causing considerable existential angst for organizations like the National Aboriginal Capital Commission Association, or NACCA. I hope I got the long title right. I'm thinking of some other programs as well around indigenous languages. I get that it feels a bit like navel-gazing and maybe I'm being a little indulgent on my last day, but these financial processes have real consequences for organizations that make a real difference in the lives of Canadians.
Something as relatively simple—I've used that term around Parliament Hill and in government departments—as coming to an understanding on a fixed period for when a budget is presented could make a big difference in averting the stress, anxiety and departure, in some cases, of staff that organizations experience because we can't get our financial process right.
I think this is about people. That's why I'm hoping to hear there's a meaningful openness to trying to make this process better.