The Auditor General has a different mandate from what we do. The Auditor General went in and dide a broad-based audit on management, with a focus on financial management, and made some observations about questionable staffing activities up to 2004. We were just going through the transition of going to the new act and redoing delegations. Since the Auditor General had raised a question about staffing, we then decided that it was important for us to go and see whether we had appropriately delegated. We had done a first analysis and asked, “Are the conditions in place to delegate?” We thought they were. We wanted to make sure that this was a correct judgment, based on the Auditor General's audit.
Our conclusion was that they had made a number of significant improvements but there were still problems. So we imposed a condition on the delegation, but a lower-level condition, which requires them to report more frequently to us so we can make sure they get the staffing on the right track. As we could see, they had a number of the elements in place, but they weren't actually getting the decisions right. So we're now asking that they come and report back more frequently so we can make sure their follow-up actions are correct.