Dave Epp

Table it in writing.

To me, that's exactly what reinsurance does. Yes, obviously you're paying a premium. If the premium is paid sixty-forty when the province is enrolled, as I understand it is, in theory, it's to protect their treasuries. If the risk all remains in the provincial treasury, that is the federal government somewhat paying their share of premiums. I'm all for having a discussion. Whether a national, [more]

Is the federal government open to considering the use of private reinsurance for its own programs, to protect its own treasury?

I have one last question on science and tech for today. Again, on the transfer of innovations and science developed within AAFC, the target was 500 to transfer to the sector; 111 were successful. There was an 80% failure rate. Is that a change in metrics? Where's the disconnect there?

The example of Alberta in the last couple of years is exactly the issue. They've gone through about $5 billion in funds or $5 billion in claims in a deficit position and now are forced to access the federal program, so it really is a loan program. My point in all this is that the entire risk of the fund or of the outcome of the program lies with the provinces. Is that a fair statement?

That's correct. When the provinces go to address some of that risk through the use of private reinsurance programs, my understanding—here's where I'm open to being corrected—is that AAFC has been less than enthusiastic about using that tool at the provincial level to address the risk to provincial treasuries.

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

If it's been actuarially sound and obviously both parties have been.... Would it not follow that when things go somewhere in a handbasket, both the federal and the provincial governments carry some of the risk to the program itself?

I'll move on to the next two soon, but let's diverge. You commented that over half of the federal APF is going towards science and innovation. In the actual results from 2024, you're actually showing a change of negative two in sector productivity when you've set a growth target of plus two. The sector's productivity is actually shrinking. What plans are in the kettle right now to address that [more]

One of the goals in the last APF was 1,100 peer-reviewed papers driving toward that productivity, yet only 129 were achieved. Now we're also talking about cuts in researchers and research stations. How do you reconcile that?

I know my time is up, but I will continue exactly on this theme in the next round.

Inaudible—Editor [] separate operations?