Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I find it curious that Mr. Anderson considers this option unworkable, whereas it would be normal to proceed in this manner in such an important case as this. In fact, these are policies that are being established, and a change in orientation. I would find it hard to understand if, in five years, he himself didn't request this because he would like to have the opportunity to discuss the matter in committee.
You say this has never been done in the case of the nuclear issue. But we're talking here about a small part of the federal government's overall power. However, it takes this kind of approach toward the committees on other matters. It isn't because this has never been done on the nuclear issue that it's infeasible. I don't understand why you find this more difficult than anything else. We're coming back to study appropriations and all kinds of other issues.
Mr. Anderson, we know perfectly well that, by submitting something directly to the House, we have much less of a chance of knowing the how and why of the regulations. We also know that the consultation is often directed by the sitting minister and that there isn't at all the same type of consultation in the committees.
How much time would it take to conduct this kind of consultation? It seems to me it wouldn't take more time than in the case of a statute. These regulations will be as important as the act itself.