I have to say, first, I'm heartened by the work your office does. It's a sign of strong democracy at work, which always strives to correct itself. We all know that in an organization as big as the federal government, there will be errors and deliberate mistakes, and we need somebody to oversee or make sure those errors are not made or repeated.
My question to you is, how do we set up a system that makes this monitoring much more frequent and immediate, i.e., perhaps by using some performance indices or some permanent offices within the department?
Again, a lot of my colleagues have been using their personal experiences. I can tell you, from my experience in the private sector, there are accounting auditors. The person who oversees the performance of accounting within a department or an agency is a comptroller. There are quality assurance auditors. There are people who oversee performance, such as quality assurance managers, and so on and so forth.
There might be a systemic issue here that we can fix or improve upon. I know some people alluded to the surplus. Maybe that is a symptom, but I think it's much more mechanical or technical than that.
Do you have any thoughts on this?