It also begs the question—and I agree with you about the numbers, by the way—assuming 1,689, give or take one or two, call it 1,690, the dilemma is that you have about 400 new cases initiated this year versus last. In the year before, in 2008-09, you had 2,019. These are new cases, new complaints. In 2009-10 you had 1,689, so give or take almost 400.
Your actual increase in closing the cases was 400. If you go back to where you were in 2008-09, and it's not an unrealistic expectation, you're actually back to where you were for unclosed cases of 2008-09. You've actually regressed two years, notwithstanding all the things that you're doing. I give you a great deal of credit for all those decisions you're making and trying to do that with what I think, for all intents and purposes, is basically a shoestring budget. But that's just me. I used to be corporate chair in a municipality, and I perhaps don't know my numbers all that well, but anyway....
The other thing I found interesting that you said, when I talk about shoestring budgets and the fact that we may be spinning our wheels here, is that you don't know how many cases you'll get in a year. You can't tell me absolutely what you'll get next year, because none of us knows. There's no crystal ball.
Part of your statement was, “We have observed in the last two report cards that under-resourced institutions use time extensions as a coping mechanism, thereby creating unnecessary delays.”
My fear is—and I don't know whether you share this fear—that indeed if we don't have the resources there and our numbers do go back to what is a general level, which isn't necessarily 1,689, but higher, we will indeed get back to what I think the Canadian public sees when it comes to ATIP, which is a sense that you put it in and forget about it, and somebody will knock on your door sometime in the future and you'll say, “Oh, I did ask that question; there's my response finally.” It's somewhat akin to getting the magic prize in your mailbox from that famous magazine group that obviously I will not name.
I wonder if you have any comment on that.