Clause 1 is the overall amending of the Canada-United States Tax Convention Act. What we saw in the budget was actually a very small part of what the impacts of the overall amendments to the Canada-United States Tax Convention Act are. We found out today that the largest proportion—the withholding tax that is simply abolished or given up—is the non-arm's length, which is implemented in stages over the next three fiscal years. What we saw in budget 2007 was only a very small part of the actual fiscal implications. It's simply not correct to say that we've had full disclosure of figures.
We have not seen, either, from the department on what basis the figures were arrived at for the budget document, and that's extremely important too. We have to do our due diligence to compare past figures and then surmise to what extent the figure of $180 million that was in the budget is accurate and what the full ramifications of this tax treaty are in subsequent years. We're talking about half a billion dollars over three years, and presumably well over a billion dollars over six years.
That is a considerable amount of money, when we have 300,000 people who are homeless in our country, when we have families who are finding it very hard to make ends meet. To say that over six years, if it's a billion.... None of us around this table is very sure, because none of us has seen the actual impact studies. But let's surmise, based on the testimony we've heard, that we're talking about a billion dollars. That is not something you give up in five minutes without any understanding of what the implications are for fiscal policy and what the implications are for the government's ability to take action, hopefully, on some of the crises that exist in the country.
I think it is foolhardy for this committee to push forward on adoption of a tax treaty that has significant ramifications for the taxpayer and for public policy.