Your task force has done a remarkable job. I have a few words to describe it. First, you have a constructive approach. You also have a comprehensive approach. You have looked everywhere, you have researched the issue and you surrounded yourselves with experts. Moreover, your approach is realistic.
Just before we start the tour, I am apprehensive about meeting many people who will tell us they would like to have a lot of icing on the cake. Unfortunately, we have a problem, as the cake is missing yeast, it is stale and it won't rise. That is what you have shown us.
I really liked what you said when you mentioned that the opinion poll revealed that, once Canadians were told about some of the financial challenges facing Canada Post, it was easier for most of them to accept the changes. At the committee's previous meetings, we had discussions with our analysts about the way we could educate Canadians on the dramatic situation experienced by Canada Post, which provides a service we are all attached to.
My first point is about the fact that I come from a region with a large rural portion with no community mailboxes. I have mixed feelings because I see community mailboxes in some rural regions provided with postal service. We want to maintain the current postal service in a few parts of my riding, but elsewhere, as well. Finally, people with an inferior level of service will be asked to remain at that same level. I am concerned about fairness.
You previously talked about people with mobility problems. You said that the door-to-door service should be maintained in their case. In my riding, people with mobility problems do not have access to a door-to-door service.
I think we should find solutions that apply to all Canadians. Otherwise, the regions could turn against the cities. People will tell themselves that, because they live in the regions, they do not have the kind of service they should expect and must pay to maintain a deficient postal service.
I am talking a lot, but I have a number of issues to go over.
I will move on to my second point. Could you talk about the governance issue? It's a topic that is both intriguing and vague. Of course, the moratorium is another issue.
I will not promote my own cause in this case. Politically, it was a worthwhile thing to do. We were saying that post offices should be left alone, but it's a fact that they cost more and provide an inferior level of service. You expressed that very well in your comments.
Should we not try to take things further in terms of scenarios? The government may not accept everything you have proposed. If we don't go far enough, I figure that the government will come up with half measures.
I have talked a lot, but I want to congratulate you once again.
Thank you.