Thank you.
Your question includes several points. I'll start with the issue of lapsed appropriations. Because of the government's structure and the constraints imposed on departments, constraints which prevent them from spending more than what Parliament allocated to them, managers throughout the whole of government exercise caution. They will ask for more funding than necessary to avoid unpleasant surprises, or to avoid reaching the limit of what they can spend to deal with the unexpected. They therefore want to avoid going over their budget and overstepping the law. That means lapsed appropriations occur every year, and they're included in the government's budgetary framework.
When the government and Department of Finance officials establish their budgetary estimates, they always include the lapsed appropriations factor to reflect the fact that it happens from year to year. Obviously, when funds are added on a one-time basis—as we saw during the pandemic, for example—lapsed appropriations grow, because it's more difficult for the government to accurately predict how much it will spend.
The other question has to do with budgetary estimates and the fact that there used to be reserves, cautionary factors, which led to overestimating expenditures to make sure that the results were better than the forecast. That, among other things, is what led to creating the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer. When the government underestimated its surpluses, many parliamentarians were frustrated, because it prevented them from having truly informed debates and getting an accurate idea of public expenditures. It was a concern then, but it is less so now, thanks to the establishment of an office like mine.