I understand that there was a budget, Minister, but given the importance of these meetings, I think that elected representatives of all parties...I'm sure we can always identify one or two delegates to lead the delegation.
In any case, you can pick up on that in just a minute. I want to move on to something else.
I was looking at the web and the structure you have in terms of eligibility. We have seen the change where you have reintroduced the word “equality” in certain parts of the mandate, but the eligibility criterion really hasn't changed from the previous eligibility with respect to issues that affect women in particular issues of advocacy. I see that's still not a criterion that is acceptable.
The reason I raise this is that, as you have said, this committee has been looking at budgeting gender analysis and we've had some really strong experts here at this table—people who have done research and advocated with the help of Status of Women Canada and have advocated on behalf of women. We have seen from the analysis they have done just how disadvantaged women are in our society.
In the last two budgets, the analysis that was done was totally off, and in fact the majority of the actions of the government were in fact detrimental to women. So again there is nobody out there advocating. It's one thing to deal with a specific women's issue with respect to direct service, but it does not affect the overall change of women's equality.
I would like to know from you (a) why that criterion is still not changed, and (b) why we are still seeing budget items that are really skewed and hurt women in this country.