In British Columbia, our history is a little different. In the late 1980s or early 1990s, we had a cluster of systems of various types. In those days, ministries wanted their own systems to meet their particular needs. There was an acceptance that those needs might be varied enough to support this approach. As we got into the 1990s, we made a decision to go to another system called Walker, but Walker wasn't sufficient in light of our future direction. In the late 1990s or early 2000, we implemented, based on an RFP, Oracle Financials, with the objective of having all ministries and their supporting agencies on the same system.
I don't want to say that's the perfect answer. It worked well for us because we were already on one central system, though not the one we wanted. But ultimately we got everybody to agree to Oracle Financials. Whenever you make systems changes or add new modules—travel, accounts payable, accounts receivable, contracting, or fixed assets, which was another key module in capitalization and amortization—it's a lot easier if you make those changes with one system in mind. It allows people to be more transportable in the system, to move from ministry to ministry more easily. But I wouldn't portray it as the perfect answer.