Okay. I just wanted to touch really quickly on the relevance of data. Data is something we talk a lot about in this committee, as well as the lack of data across a lot of departments. If you go to page 11 in the report, it says that the department also noted that unemployment in any given area does not necessarily mean that there are Canadians or permanent residents available to fill those job vacancies. The reason for that is directly linked to data. Just because the data indicates one thing doesn't necessarily relay to the relevance.
I'm going to give you an example in the transportation industry. A CTA study recently identified that by 2024 there could be as many as 48,000 job vacancies in the transportation industry in Canada. The relevant data in New Brunswick would say there are 350 transportation companies in my riding, Tobique—Mactaquac, and that there's a surplus of truck-drivers there. Yet companies are utilizing the temporary foreign worker program to fill those vacancies, because they can't get enough drivers to fill those spots. Really, they're using it as a pathway to citizenship, and sometimes this program is being used for an alternative use because there's no available immigration tool to fill the void.
An example of how the data can be skewed is that when they look at data of drivers who are ready, willing, and able to fill those job vacancies, I would show up as somebody who's available to drive a truck, because I'm not working for a trucking company and I hold a class 1 driver's license. But obviously today I'm not ready, willing, and able to go to work in that industry.
When you elaborate on the reasons why industry was not included in this, I'm wondering if you could maybe give us a few comments on what your opinion is around the relevance of industry data to cross against the data from the department. It would be interesting to see how much space there is between what the department says versus what industry is saying.