Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Again, thank you to my colleagues. We've had good questions thus far.
I want to return to the issue of some of the reporting and the recommendations made by the Auditor General. I'll point your attention to section 14.32 in the report, under recommendations, which mentions that for future programs, the federal economic development agencies for northern Ontario, southern Ontario, the Prairies and the Pacific, and the other regional development agencies “should establish targeted levels of support for under-represented groups and ensure that information is collected” and used to inform decision-making.
I want to note that the agency said it “partially agreed”. This is concerning in some ways, because we want to make sure that we have real progress on the GBA+ analysis of some of this work, and data is critical to that.
I want to really remind officials, particularly Mr. Jones, of the fact that not reporting and/or not even collecting this information is a critical error in our ability to make good decisions, and it brings a judgment on our institutions when we don't do this effectively, particularly in light of the fact that other economic diversification agencies have collected it. It's a glaring fact that we're lagging behind, in the western diversification branch in particular, in relation to the other two agencies.
Why has the agency only partly agreed to this recommendation?