Thank you, Mr. Chair. Indeed, I have lots of questions, and I won't possibly get them all in.
Thanks for coming back. We thought it would be useful after the testimony we received, which was very helpful. I'm taking the opportunity to go back to the progress reports on the sustainable development strategy that Mr. McBain mentioned. In the report on 2010 to 2013, page 15 actually requires that the government link sustainable development planning with government's core expenditure planning. I have found it odd all along that the sustainable development strategy for Public Works is based on the reduction of carbon.
Now, we know that there is not unanimity among elected officials about the value of Canada investing in reducing its carbon. But I think you'll find unanimity—and it makes sense for the federal government—to reduce the spending of taxpayers' dollars. So I'm a little puzzled that given that the sustainable development strategy requires the departments to be basing their strategy on reducing core spending, why is it still in the direction of tying it to reduction of carbon?
I noticed, Mr. McBain, that you reported—and I haven't seen the most recent report—that in addition to reducing carbon, Public Works had reduced its energy use by 4%, whereas the last report said there was reduced carbon but higher energy use. So it looks as though there must be some good things happening. I'm wondering if you could speak to that.
I noticed in the sustainable development strategy the mandate for Public Works seems to be limited to guidance, consulting, and monitoring for other government departments. I'm wondering if in that role you have been advising government that as one of the measures to reduce spending and bring down the deficit they could be investing more in energy efficiency.