I want to applaud my honourable colleague who frequently champions the need for transparency in the government. I have some problems with this issue because I fundamentally believe, not because we do not want transparency, I do not think we should ask the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce to table who they lend their money to in this House. Now, I know he is going to tell me, well, the government financed this fund and that is true. But they repay it so there is a net impact to the government. I would have to look at it because I think we are invading people's private requests for money. Nothing else. I think, if we table that criteria for the funding, et cetera, it should reassure him whatever. I do not know quite where my colleague sometimes goes with this stuff, but you know he does have a tendency to read novels and watch Oliver Stone movies.
I would be prepared to table in the House at this stage, the criteria for this fund and the conditions set by it. Perhaps, how many loans, I am not prepared to table who gets loans. That is a private matter, et cetera. I know but I am answering it. Do I hear an echo? You know, I have a bit of a philosophical difference with my colleague on this issue because I feel it is a private matter. It is not because I do not want transparency, but I believe it is a private matter. When I put my money, what little I do have, into CIBC and in GIC's or whatever, I do not want to ask them who they lend the money to. This is a private fund, funded by outside investors from offshore, so I will have to work out, to give my honourable colleague comfort, the level of detail he wants. I will commit to doing that so there is at least some level of transparency so he is comfortable in the world he lives in, with the phone calls he gets from his constituents with respect to this fund and reassure him that we will do the best we can to bring forward as much information as we can so he will stop getting phone calls about it. Thank you.