I'd really like to commend my colleague over there very quickly for realizing that I am a good reader and that I am also a really good note-taker. Thank you for that, colleague.
Would this be meaningful to enhancing our understanding of the actual problem at hand, or is it simply to create overwhelming volumes of material that is difficult to navigate, time-consuming to produce and costly to compile? In this motion, you want all of that done within 30 days of adoption.
I would argue the latter, and that's why I believe that we need to approach this a lot more thoroughly and work together as a team. Yesterday, our Prime Minister talked about how important it is to work as a team within government and create those partnerships and a lack of transparency barriers. Let's ask for the documents that are directly relevant to those concerns without a defined timeline or in a way that's feasible for departments to deliver.
I don't think this is working as a team. Just to let my colleague know, I did not read that off my page.
Let's talk about how we strike the right balance between accountability and practicality. At the end of the day, our goal is not to generate paper. It's to generate insight, and it's to ensure that we have the information we need to do our jobs effectively without imposing unnecessary burdens on that system or diverting resources away from Canadians, which is what we're doing right now.
We had all of these witnesses here today to talk to us about the implementation of Bill C-20 in the building of Build Canada Homes. We had them all here, specialists in their area, some of our top-notch people—only to say that they could come here, pay the money to come as a witness and then have to go home before our first round even got finished.
If you talk about people who are facing real challenges, they're also navigating affordability challenges, accessing services and relying on government programs. They expect us as parliamentarians to be responsible stewards of public resources and to prioritize outcomes that make a difference in daily lives. A motion that would cost millions of dollars of taxpayer money, that would take months and months to complete and that has to be done in 30 days.... I don't think this motion helps to prioritize outcomes or makes a difference in daily lives.
This makes us go to our constituents to say that, unfortunately, we are onboarding a brand new program that's been almost 60 years in the making of change and implementation, and if we have any vulnerable people in our constituencies who are affected by this, to help work with our constituents. It's our job to help our constituents. It's not to try to get tons of papers, when Minister Hajdu has already provided information and transparency about this, as has Minister Lightbound.
It might sound like some strong accountability but, in practice, this also risks being counterproductive. I would encourage colleagues to take a step back, consider a more balanced approach and recognize the work that's already been done. Let's acknowledge information that's already been provided, and let's focus on identifying any of the gaps that remain. This would allow us to address them effectively without creating undue burden. That could mean amending a motion to narrow scope or specifying particular documents or specific time periods. It could also be about setting a more realistic timeline that reflects the complexity of this task. There are options to this motion.
Maintaining the motion as it currently stands, in my view, is the right path forward. It's about how we as a committee choose to exercise this type of authority. It's about setting a standard for how we balance that transparency with practicality, with accountability and then with responsibility. We have the tools that we need to do our work effectively. This is a question, I believe, of whether we do this wisely.
In this case I would suggest a more targeted, realistic and proportionate approach that would serve both this committee and Canadians and that would help us deliver what's currently being proposed far better.