Yes. I'm keenly interested. I will be watching with interest, given the testimony by members of the different departments here, to see exactly how they're doing the gender-based analysis plus in their submissions to TBS and to see if there is a national standard on how this is being applied through the TBS.
Because what I'm afraid of—and I will put my cards right on the table here—is the language of equity, diversity and inclusion without a commitment to outcomes and actions. That setting aside of partisanship in the conversation around what identity politics look like without actually having a commitment to justice is, in my opinion, actually worse than not even bringing it up and talking about and committing to it in the first place.
I actually think it does a disservice to have policies like the federal contractors program that nobody seems to know about and that we have no idea whether it has been applied. You go on their website. Not one company that is over $1 million and that is supposed to have an equity policy in place and that is supposed to be audited—if they're not audited, compliance says that they will not get further business—is on that list, not one company. I can't for the life of me imagine that there's 100% compliance with contracts over a million dollars, and there have been hundreds of billions of dollars put out during COVID without any real tracking of where it's landing.
What I want to do in this remaining part of this section is allow the different members from the different departments to maybe speak a bit about how they are actually implementing towards outcomes, not just gender-based analysis that talks about having men and women being equal, but the plus side as identified by this committee in our own equity policies.