Government Operations committee  Certainly we could see if we can get information on that and come back to you, but I'm not actually aware of the rationale behind that historic context.

Government Operations committee  I don't think we're in a position to answer that right now.

Government Operations committee  I would be optimistic. Again, I don't know what the systems are, and so on, but it seems intuitive to me that, because you already have two of the three pillars and you already have the systems in place, there should be a shorter time frame. We don't have the expertise to comment

Government Operations committee  Definitely, the private sector has a different accountability cycle. The focus on the budget is quite different in the private sector. A budget is obviously a public document in government. In a private enterprise it is not, so it is a little bit different. I was really referri

Government Operations committee  I think they already do. The adoption of full accrual accounting by the government in 2001 was already in effect an alignment with a practice that has been occurring in the private sector for many years. I would suggest that on that side it's already aligned.

Government Operations committee  Perhaps I'll answer the second question first and come back, just because it's French. In terms of methods to make.... Martha suggested, and I would agree, that there is experience out there. Understanding the experience and the best practices that have already happened I think w

Government Operations committee  It took nine years to shift from a full cash basis that was being used for the public accounts, for the estimates, and for the budget to shift to having a full accrual basis for all of those. It took eight years to shift the financial statements and budgets and it took an extra y

Government Operations committee  In terms of that third pillar, because that piece is missing, as an overall it's hard to link the appropriations to the budget and to the financial statements. The budgets and the financial statements are prepared on the same basis, the accrual basis, so you can compare those two

Government Operations committee  It's difficult for us to answer that.

Government Operations committee  I think the challenge for us answering that is not knowing the systems you have.

Government Operations committee  Because you have two of three pillars in place already, it would be my intuitive sense that there are already systems in place that would make this fairly straightforward to shift.

Government Operations committee  There are standards for accounting for pension liabilities. There are an enormous number of estimates, and you would have to make estimates based on actuarial assumptions. There's a large body of literature out there already. Truthfully pension accounting, as complicated as it c

Government Operations committee  I think as a general statement, it makes sense in terms of the financial cycle and the accountability cycle without knowing all of the details. From our perspective as accountants, it's more intuitive because there's a more logical link. You would be able to see the policy decis

Government Operations committee  The first thing I would say is that if you're not focused on an accrual basis, you're not focused on the long term. It's easy to make decisions for the short term on the next period you're working on, such as the next budget period for the next fiscal year, for example. It tends

Government Operations committee  I know the approximate timelines. The recommendation to do this was made in 1995. There was an Ontario Financial Review Commission in 1995, and there was a recommendation out of that for all three—the public accounts, the budget, and the estimates—to move to full accrual accounti