I think we've done virtually everything we can do now with the backlogs. Basically, there are a number of different deadlines in the act and the code. In the act, there's a 60-day deadline to get your statements in. We're not getting them within the 60 days now only if, for some reason, we aren't told about the new person in the job. As soon as we find out about them, we immediately send a letter. Normally we find out within 10 days or something, and a letter goes out. We're paying a lot of attention to going back. We now have a 30-day check with them if they haven't contacted us, and then a 50-day check with them.
As I said, much of this developed in the context of trying to get a sufficiently regulated system that was rigorous enough that we could start to consider imposing penalties, because we didn't feel we could impose penalties until we'd given people a chance to make sure they knew they had an obligation.
The 60-day deadline is virtually always met now, because we give them the 50-day warning. I think only in one or two cases have we sent them the first stage of an actual penalty imposition. Then they immediately rush in and do it. With the 120-day deadline it's a little more difficult, because sometimes there are very complicated cases that we have to deal with, particularly, for example, with people who have estates to deal with. Technically they have to divest, and there are delays in completing the complicated situations. I forget the number now. Is it 38? That's the number that comes to my mind: 38 out of 1,000 that have not met the 120-day deadline. So we're doing very well, even on the 120-day one. Those are two.
There are other deadlines that are more difficult to deal with, for example, for gifts. You're supposed to report a gift within 30 days. We don't get an awful lot of gifts reported, and that's a difficult one. Our system is like the tax system, only the tax system sort of finds it somehow, one way or another. With gifts being reported, there's really no way we can find out if somebody's getting a gift unless we hear about it somehow. Every so often you see something in the press, and you then contact the person. So I have no way of knowing the extent to which people have failed to disclose their gifts.
There's another one telling us whether they have a firm offer of employment, and they have to do that within seven days, I believe. I think probably we're getting most of those, because we find out when they've left.
Recusals are another one. How the heck do we know if they don't tell us that they should have recused, unless we see in the press or we hear about it from somebody else? Those are the sorts of things on which we might get a request for an investigation, for example.
Is that good?