Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm going to split my time with my colleague, Ms. Falk.
I wanted to start with the minister's last comment. We're not saying there should be a ceiling to the cost, but I think it is our fiduciary responsibility as legislators to understand that a budget should be set and costs should be understood. I found it ironic, that as we talk about Canadians with disabilities, there is no ceiling to the cost.
I know our Prime Minister said there is a threshold of spending when it comes to veterans and many of them are disabled and have issues. There seems to be some disconnect there.
We're not saying by any means that there should be a ceiling. We would, as legislators and representatives of our constituents and taxpayers...on what the costs would be.
My question to the officials is a clarification for me. Reading through the bill, in subsection 73(1) it says:
the Accessibility Commissioner may, for a purpose related to verifying compliance or preventing non-compliance...enter any place, including a conveyance, in which he or she has reasonable grounds to believe there is any record, report, electronic data or other document, or any information or thing, relevant to that purpose.
I just want to make sure I'm not reading too much into this, and the fact that a commissioner can enter a place of business for preventing non-compliance. Is that unusual, that you are predicting that a business is not going to comply with the new regulations, and you're able to go in there? I'm wondering if you could explain that section in the legislation.