I'll give three points briefly.
I think the first is really important, and I appreciate that you're hearing from the business community. ACROSS and eManifest are the systems that allow goods into the country. CARM is the accounting system that affects issues weeks and months after the fact. For people worried about perishable goods being stuck at the border and the speed of commerce being delayed, I think the message to give them is that eManifest and ACROSS are the systems to do that, and we're not changing them.
The business case for CARM starts with a system that's more than 35 years old. It could go down, and we could have nothing. I could be in this chair testifying to you to explain why I allowed a 35-year-old system to go into a 36th year and why we had catastrophic failure and no accounting on $40 billion of government revenue, $40 billion of revenue that the trade chain partners want to be exact.
Exactitude is the third point I would raise. The CBSA itself was concerned with the level of discrepancy in errors. the OAG certainly highlighted that through multiple reports. We want to have a modern tool that gives feedback to businesses on the accuracy of their submissions. We want the government to have control over the calculation of tax and duties, and we want there to be a level playing field within the business community. We don't want a business that short pays the tax they owe to have a competitive advantage over another business.