Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It's quite interesting to hear how the Liberal government is being accused of not being transparent, when we all know the work that has been done to date. Both Minister Hajdu and Minister Lightbound, as well as their officials and offices, have appeared on the issue. The officials have provided a technical briefing to critics. Officials provided the committee with regional breakdowns and costing at the request of the committee. There has already been significant transparency and engagement on this file. For months and weeks, we've heard over and over questions in question period about the Cúram system from all the opposition parties. I don't know how anyone can think that's not being transparent.
As my colleagues have mentioned, this motion is requesting millions of pages across multiple departments. This could cost millions of dollars, and it would not be completed within the time frame suggested in the motion. A 30-day timeline is completely unrealistic, especially when we've already heard the opposition members say that our seniors are a vulnerable population and they need to receive their OAS payments on time. That's exactly what the department is trying to do, to make sure that they do serve the population not only for the OAS, but also for so many other programs that are being delivered through that department.
There are 40,000 employees working in ESDC. It's one of the largest ministries that we have in government. I always say that from the moment someone is born to their end of life, all the programs in between come through that department.
To think that 30 days is a reasonable amount of time to ask for all of this documentation is completely unrealistic. Everyone watching us today, Quebeckers and Canadians from coast to coast to coast, must be scratching their heads and thinking that if there really is a problem with this system and there are kinks or issues that need to be resolved, how is it helping by wasting the time of this committee, which is working on so many other important studies and legislative pieces that Canadians rely on? One of them is Bill C-20, on delivering affordable housing in a timely manner. I'm sure many Canadians who are watching are scratching their heads today.
This would require the public service to comb through millions of documents across multiple departments. Although we haven't seen the estimate of the costs, you can imagine if you've been in private business.... When you are using resources in the department in this way, work in other areas that needs to be done is not being done. It costs money. Resources cost money. They're not free.
Every dollar that we are using is to make sure that Canadians are delivered the services that they expect. Canadians expect timely service. This motion would redirect public servants away from the processing claims. I don't see how this motion deals with the concerns that are being raised.
Our focus should be on improving service delivery and not creating an administrative burden. Having been in the private sector for many years, I can tell you this is not the correct way to use money, whether it's in the private sector or in the public sector. This is not what Canadians are expecting us to use their taxpayer dollars for: to produce more papers, to sift through more papers, and to take up committee time—not only our committee time, but the time of other committees that are looking at this very same issue.
I think our government, the ministries involved and the officials have provided more than adequate information. If there is any reason more technical briefings or explanations are required of the officials, I am sure they would be more than willing to meet with HUMA committee members to provide them with any additional information they have, to better understand how complicated it is to replace a 60-year-old system with a new modern system of delivering benefits. It's really not an easy feat. I'm sure everyone around this table agrees with that, but we are where we are.
It's not an easy time. I understand that opposition members may be frustrated. Perhaps things will change in the near future, and this is their way of showing how unhappy they are. I really do understand that.
If we're going to continue to work together and deliver for Canadians, we need to take a step back and ask ourselves if we are really using the time in this committee and other committees to do what Canadians expect of us. Isn't it a shame that we couldn't continue listening to the witnesses who were invited here to discuss Bill C-20? Here we are talking more about answers that we've already been given by officials and by the ministers.
As I said, for queries that are still unanswered, I am certain that any information that committee members need would be given within a time frame that is feasible.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.