That would be great.
Can I also ask another question around that? It's almost irrelevant in my view to talk about where Canada fits with other OECD countries in terms of what we're spending combined—what percentage of GDP—unless you're in a position to tell Canadians what the needs are. What are the real needs in infrastructure? One of the things your presentation skirts around, Mr. Moore, with all due respect.... Perhaps you don't have the number, which is fine. Maybe you can get it for us.
What would be very helpful for this committee as it looks at this study is what the needs are. What criteria and metrics are you using to assess the needs? I'm going to be very specific here. What metrics are you using to assess the needs? What is the gap? We hear all kinds of numbers thrown around by any order of government, any city, to be frank. It's very convoluted. We don't really know whether we're comparing apples and oranges.
Do you have or can you get a number and an explanation with real statistics and metrics to tell Canadians what the gap is, say, going out 10, 20, or 50 years? It's irrelevant to tell us that 3.9% of GDP is going to infrastructure because you have to compare it to something. I would submit that comparing it to other countries is one way to do it, but the more important comparison for me would be—and for us, I think—comparing it to what in terms of needs.
You say in your presentation on page 8 that numbers don't provide any indication of the optimal level of investment needed to support a competitive and resilient economy. Well, isn't that what we're supposed to be doing here with infrastructure investments? Aren't we really supposed to achieve the optimal level of investment so that we have a competitive and resilient economy? Can you get us a number? Can you give us what the indication should be in order to have an optimal level of investment to support a competitive and resilient economy?