You've done a fair bit of work, it seems, on the issue of casual employees and how they're being drawn into the public service. Have you had a chance to look at the issue of turnover in various departments? The question I would raise is that I know there are certain departments where there's bidding for jobs between an urban centre and say a large rural region like Timmins--James Bay, where we have a very low turnover of federal employees. The argument we always put forward is that when you invest in a federal employee in one of the regions you have someone who is committed there for life. Yet some of the anecdotal evidence we're hearing is that we're putting a fair amount of cost into training workers in some of the large urban centres. You're seeing higher levels of turnovers because there are a lot more opportunities: once they're trained, they can move on.
Have you looked at the issue of turnover and what effect that has on the efficiency of various departments?