Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much, everybody. It's not normal that we get so many people, and all at the same time. It's going to be difficult for us to parse it.
I want to focus on vote 35. I want to focus on the fact that we supported the budget, and in particular vote 35, because of a recognition that in a recession we needed extra money, incremental money, out on the street, if you will.
We have heard announcements for a number of weeks now, we've heard allocations, we have heard reannouncements, but we remain concerned that there hasn't been much evidence of money that has been put out into the street that is incremental to what would otherwise be there. I say that understanding the bridging nature of vote 35. This may have allowed that bridging in terms of future timing, but we still have not had any, or very few, answers and examples of specific cheques being cut so that jobs are being created now that otherwise would not have been.
I do want to commend Ms. Mortimer. In your piece you focus on some additional jobs that have been created; Mr. Robins from AECL as well; and Mr. Vermaeten, in particular the last piece on the summer jobs. But generally I think we have from Mr. Vermaeten an acknowledgement, which we've certainly understood, that this money has to be used between April 1 and June 30. I go back to “used”. We want to know what money has gone out that's over and above what would have been out there, that has actively created jobs now and over the next few months that are incremental, that would not otherwise have been.
Perhaps I can pick Mr. Lindsey. I didn't hear so much from you. We had understood there was a fair bit, and certainly the allocations industry has a lot. Can you give me some specific examples of jobs that are being created now, that are incremental to what otherwise would have been, thanks to money that I'm hoping you can tell me has been spent so far?