Good governance usually means that you have someone who is acting as a quasi-challenger. In this case, would Treasury Board view this as Treasury Board pushing back and saying that they think your back office expenses are higher or whatnot? Do you feel that this would impede the independence of the officer? The office itself does exist within an institution, and the institution, like all institutions, has budgetary constraints.
There is a good governance rationale for saying that we should have someone that challenges or checks your work to ensure money is being spent in an accountable way. I'm open to hearing some sort of idea of how it can be done otherwise under the system.