Excellent question, but I'm not quite sure how to respond to it. We would have expected the government to follow its own accounting policies.
In this case, we do not believe they did, and we believe there were $21 million in costs that were not recorded in the correct year, and if they had been recorded in that year, the government would have had to go back for supplementary estimates and authority to spend that money.
We view this as a serious issue, otherwise we wouldn't have raised the issue in a report. I guess one of the checks and balances is that we do have reports like this—hopefully rare and far between—but perhaps the Comptroller General would want to address their view of the matter.