Thank you.
One of our members opposite talked about why we made a decision—or a decision was made by the minister—to bring in an external auditor to review some expenses that you've outlined there, what the rationale was, and was that a question of confidence in our own folks at PWGSC. I would submit, as I recall sitting in the House during that period of time, that there were a number of members opposite who were fairly aggressive about the expenses associated with some of the items you have outlined that would, on the face of it, appear higher than what might otherwise be, until you got into “the devil is in the details”.
Where you've indicated that you look forward to or certainly welcome and are prepared to be supportive of the external audit, do you believe that the expenses associated with those half dozen or eight items in particular that were outlined in some recent press will stand up to scrutiny of the external audit?