Okay. That was the first part of my question. I have just a couple of other things.
It was good to get this document. It refreshed my memory on what we had talked about. I know that migrant workers were at the top of the list when we talked last time. They were very front and foremost in the area that we talked about that we should be studying in trying to do something. It was an area that would or could make a difference in women's lives.
The area of gender and trade is an interesting one, but I agree with Ms. Minna that definitely it is a big area. I don't think you really want to combine it too much with something else. I think it would deserve a tremendous amount of research on its own.
Gender-based analysis in government departments is extremely important, but I think we have done some of it. I don't know that we've done all of it, but we certainly have talked with some. I'm wondering how much more we're going to hear that is new.
It seems to me that when we talked about it in the last session, every department we talked to was already incorporating that. They were not, I would say, at the level that they were going to be finished at, but they were incorporating and continuing on. But I'm not sure; maybe it's the expectation of the committee to see how far they have gone and what their top level would be. I can't remember when we put this down.
Gender budgeting, same thing.
I thought the Sisters in Spirit program was another interesting one. I know that we spent a fair amount of time talking about that.
There are a lot of things in here, including a Status of Women Canada review and those types of things. I think those are very interesting ones as well.
I just can't see us spending too lengthy a time on the gender-based analysis or gender budgeting, because I think we do have a lot of that information already there. I think we'd be hearing the same people over and over again. We'd be hearing the same testimony, the same presentation. If we were going to look at it from the point of trying to focus on what the end result should be and could be, then that might be a little bit different take on what we've done with it before.
So I'd need some clarification, I think, before I could support that as the main thrust of where we're going for this session.