Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Let me begin, Mr. Page, by expressing my profound and continued disappointment at the lack of cooperation you seem to be getting in making inquiries on our behalf and on behalf of Canadians. It disturbs me profoundly that you say in your testimony that your repeated requests for basic information have been ignored--not only turned down but ignored. It speaks to a lack of respect for the office that was established, again an office that we had great hope, optimism, and confidence in when it was created and established.
The public has a right to know these things. And if not the public, if they can make an argument why some of this information shouldn't be openly public, then surely the Parliament of Canada has a right to know what the executive branch is doing or, in the context of estimates, plans to do. We shouldn't have to wait for the public accounts process to analyze and assess the veracity or the wisdom of the spending decisions made.
By the estimates process, we're supposed to have a right to assess whether the risk is worth it, and I'm glad you made reference to the fact that one of the specific things we've asked you to assess in this whole massive process is a risk analysis.
Let me ask you some specific questions, sir, in the context of the operating budget freeze. I suppose my first question is, where are we going to find the information that's being denied to you? If that information is not made available to us, why should we approve the supplementary estimates (B) in the absence of the information that we need to make an informed choice?