It's sounding like at least the two of you are suggesting that we need to be not just looking at a review of how we do postal delivery; we also need to be looking at service delivery for federal programs.
As members of Parliament, our constituency office serves people who have problems with Revenue Canada or with pensions. People don't even know they have a right to a pension. We also heard from a retired member of Canada Post that they do all kinds of things that are not even in their contract, but that we just take for granted.
I'm encouraged by what all of you are saying about the opportunity. We should be looking at the opportunities to make sure we cover the costs because by law it's supposed to be self-sustaining, not profitable, not profit-making. Yes, we're raising the fees for Parks Canada, but we don't expect Parks Canada to be profitable.
I'm wondering if you could speak to that and give us a few more ideas of opportunities that could be pursued in this review. In fact, if you've had an opportunity to see the report by the task force, they actually report that about 94% of Canadians and businesses value Canada Post and think it's important. It sounds like the challenge we have is how you continue that service, but outside the box. That's why I like what you're saying.
Mr. Newell.