Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'd like to start by commenting briefly on a comment from a member opposite. The comment was around the subamendments, which require clarification for the reporting, being considered red tape. I want to speak to that, because there is, of course, a very important difference between red tape and transparency and additional information for Canadians. It is important to not confuse the two, and not only for the government to not confuse the two but also for Canadians to understand that there is, in fact, a big difference between the two.
Red tape is actually a topic that comes up quite often in my discussions with entrepreneurs and small businesses. Of course, in the context of a small business, it is important to them, because it's when the small business owner spends hours filling out forms that, sometimes, might never be read. As you can imagine, that is a great source of frustration, because there are resources that are being invested. Oftentimes, people have to be hired just to fill out forms, and then they lead to nowhere. For example, it is when a farmer, a manufacturer or an entrepreneur has to navigate layers upon layers of approvals, permits and paperwork, just to do what they already know how to do. Red tape slows down investment, discourages innovation and makes it harder to create jobs.
On the flip side, though, transparency is something entirely different. Transparency means giving Canadians more information and the information that they need to not only understand whatever goes on in the government, and the initiatives and policies of the government, but also hold their government accountable.
We do hear that there is, oftentimes, a bit of a disconnect between the two. Transparency means publishing clear data on taxpayer dollars and on how these taxpayer dollars are being spent. It means reporting on whether or not programs are actually achieving objectives. It means allowing Parliament and Canadians to see the results of government decisions, so when—