Thank you, Chair.
I'll endeavour to keep my comments brief. I know that Mr. Lawrence is eager to make an intervention on this point, but I want to thank Mr. Lawton for moving this amendment. It quite accurately captures the suggestions or challenges with the lack of stress testing, as currently proposed, that I was elaborating on earlier. I just want to thank Mr. Lawton for encapsulating that in this excellent subamendment.
I'll respond a little to what we're hearing government members heckling about—that this stress testing already exists in another form. I mentioned that in my initial comments. The chief actuary regularly performs sensitivity analysis in broader CPP reports, but this supplement contains little discussion of downside cases. If you're only stress testing and not talking about those cases when you're publishing a report and having it tabled in Parliament, it defeats the purpose of doing the stress testing in the first place.
Our argument is to include that in the amendment, which, to remind them, would require, if passed, new reporting requirements under the act. We acknowledge that when we drafted CPC-13, we missed a few provisions to include stress testing in that amendment. Therefore, we are subamending that on to the provision, requiring these additional reports now. This would more accurately respond to Canadians' concerns and give the government an easier time of explaining to Canadians just how secure their CPP truly is.
I think that's an important provision to include. I'm looking forward to the government's supporting both the subamendment and the amendment to ensure greater transparency. It will include these provisions, which I think will give Canadians the surety they need.
With that, Madam Chair, I'll defer to my other colleagues, who I know are eager to make further interventions.