No, on the contrary. I think the honourable member has raised important issues. Thank you very much,
I'll just go through those examples, and maybe this would then provide clarification on some of the work we do and the timing of it. The member is quite right that under the FSDS we were requested to comment in advance of. To give an example of what that looked like in the letter that I sent to the minister under my statutory obligations in June, we did an assessment of the targets, the goals, and the initiatives in the draft strategy. So there was something there for us to examine that the government had released in March on its draft strategy, which looked at the eight goals, 23 targets, and 2,200 existing initiatives. We asked “Can they be assessed?”--meaning can they be assessed from what we know right now--and what we said was “Not very well” in that 30% of the targets and 5% of the implementation strategies had enough information.
So that goes to some of the work that our office does. Certainly the member is right; we would look at a governmental strategy, a governmental plan, which by definition is forward-looking, and we would take apart the components of that plan to say do they have a baseline, do they have a timeline, do they know where they are now, do they know where they want to get to, do they know how they're getting there, and do they know a way of reporting if they are succeeding or not.