Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to thank professors Franks and Wehner for their presentations. They were very learned presentations. They will help us a great deal in our work and the study we are carrying out.
I very much appreciated that Mr. Wehner's brief referred to the advantages of having a parliamentary budget officer, and of being able to benefit from the work he does. I hope that everyone took note of that. It is important.
Regarding appropriations, first of all in context of the main estimates and then in the budget and public accounts, the process is really quite long. It lasts about 18 months. When we receive the main estimates, we are unable to compare them to the main estimates from the previous year because the supplementary estimates are of course not taken into consideration. Moreover, the main estimates are submitted long before the budget. So there is no link between the budget and the main estimates. In short, it is difficult to compare apples, oranges and bananas. I believe you both made suggestions that would lead to changes in the process.
Mr. Wehner, you recommend tabling the budget no less than three months prior to the start of the relevant fiscal year, hence allowing us three months to review it. May I point out that this year, we have three days at our disposal.
Mr. Franks, regarding the timing of the budget speech, you suggested that it not be held on ways and means, but at some other time, on supply.
I would like you tell us more about the timing, and what process would in your opinion be the most logical and the most conducive to our doing our work as parliamentarians properly when we crunch the numbers. Also, we must see to it that the government is accountable to parliamentarians.