I don't really want to detain you long with a presentation, since I did have a chance to talk to you some weeks ago. There are just a couple of things that I want to point out.
One has to do with the complexity of determining pay equity. One of the things that has bogged down systems that have been aimed at achieving pay equity, such as joint job evaluation, is the complexity, because generally speaking the comparison is between components of jobs, not whole jobs. That's a very complex process, and there are a number of models on the market. I think one of the things that led to all that protracted litigation under the Canadian Human Rights Act was that numerous experts testified for very long periods of time about different models.
If there's something useful that you could accomplish if you decide to go ahead with some sort of pay equity legislation, it's not necessarily to choose one particular model but to provide the guidance on what kind of model might be advantageous. That really is a research project. There are lots of people with expertise in those areas who I think could provide assistance in determining what the limits should be on the possible models for implementing pay equity.
Compared to, say, employment equity, where you are just deciding how the workforce should proportionately reflect society, or equal pay legislation, which really does compare the same job and decide whether people are achieving the same pay rate, I think pay equity is always going to be a more complicated proposition, and you have to be prepared for that.
Other than that, I would just welcome your questions.
Thanks.