Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'll make a brief comment before I continue on the line of questioning.
Colleagues, Canadians, we are here with a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that we hold any type expenditure...we need better [Inaudible—Editor] and accountability. It is fair to ask tough questions. It is fair to ask clarification questions. It is fair to challenge the premise of a decision that was made by officials, but I strongly recommend that we ensure we honour the true meaning of being a member of Parliament who represents Canadians, and stop labelling our officials, who are working hard. These officials may be working with other parties—hopefully, not for a long time—but these officials need respect, because they are working very hard to represent Canada and Canada's interests.
Thank you.
On Canada and Canada's interests, I want to go to, I believe, Mr. Mark Allen.
I talked before about framing our conversation with three themes. One is imperative. I think we have it. I think our closing of the last round was around policies that were followed, values and getting value for money. A lot of documents are going to come, and we're going to have an opportunity to look at those calculations and valuations and decide whether it is value for money.
I really want to talk about the third theme, which is importance. We've talked about it a number of times, and we've come at it from an angle, saying, “You know what? We probably could have served it somewhere else.”
Can you give me a sense of how big this mission is, from a dollar value point of view, for trade? We're debating whether it's two meetings that are being held or it's one meeting every two weeks, but how important are these meetings? I hear $200 billion. I hear about representing six or seven jurisdictions.
Can you break down for us how important the work we are doing in this area is?