Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Page, to you and your office I have to say a tremendous thank you. I don't think we would have a debate in this country over the legislation that's in front of us, were it not for your work in creating a debate around the costs.
I'm particularly concerned about this. I'm going to go over this just to illustrate the point.
On February 15, 2010, the public safety minister said, referring to Bill C-25, with its two-for-one remand credit:
We're not exactly sure how much it will cost us. There are some low estimates, and some that would see more spent—not more than $90 million.
Now, as you know, some two days later, on February 17, news stories broke that your office would be undertaking a study, at my request, of Bill C-25, and overnight the minister said, well, it's not really $90 million; it's $2 billion. Then, of course, your report some eight months later came out and said it's not $2 billion, but $5 billion federally and maybe $5 billion to $8 billion provincially.
We have 24 bills in front of us right now, and I can go through all the numbers, but I think that would take too much of my seven minutes. How imperative do you think it is for Parliament, in weighing its decisions, to have the costing information on each of those bills and particularly to see the background information to assess the veracity of it, particularly given the experience with Bill C-25?