It's really a question of coherence and comprehension. Tabling main estimates last year in advance of the budget—everyone knew there was an important budget coming because of the platform commitments around infrastructure, environment, and aboriginals—made absolutely no sense. We put in front of Parliament a document that was of very little utility to committees. Then we had to race, to work very, very hard, to bring forward those budget items in the supplementary estimates.
By changing the process so that the estimates are presented after the budget, we are presenting a much more coherent picture to parliamentarians and rendering their study of the estimates, I believe, much more fruitful and useful. I make the point that we would also be simplifying processes so that in that June supply period, you would have a single supply bill for main estimates, as opposed to now where we have full supply for main estimates and supplementary estimates. It's somewhat confusing to have two appropriation acts presented on the same day. Then we would focus the supply periods in December and March on what would then become supplementaries (A) and (B).
Committees would be thereby engaged throughout the year in a continuous study of estimates. As the minister said, there is a commitment that if departments table estimates, ministers will appear and speak to and explain their estimate requirements.