Yes, and that's exactly the point. We don't have any evidence of political intervention on the renovation contracts of West Block.
Certainly we appreciate both of the testimonies we've heard here today. We do appreciate the contributions that you've made, because it is important that governments at all levels undertake a review of the practices as they relate to contracting to ensure that taxpayers are always getting the best price and the best value for money.
I wonder if we might go through some of the suggestions. Many of the suggestions, Mr. Hollander, that you've made this morning are actually suggestions the department and the government have undertaken to put into place. Obviously there was a desire and a need to ensure transparency and to elevate the assurances to the taxpayer that no wrongdoing was being undertaken within government departments. As a result of the Federal Accountability Act, many of the provisions that you're suggesting have actually been undertaken.
Specifically, many of the different points in which you believe that some wrongdoing might take place wouldn't really apply to this particular study. You specify that in determining whether a project should go ahead, that may be an opportunity for an intervention of some wrongdoing.
In this case, there is no question that West Block is falling down. There really are not many who would question the legitimacy of the need for the restructuring of the masonry of the West Block.
I am wondering, as it relates to the study that we have in hand today, if you have any suggestions that aren't covered off by the Federal Accountability Act or things we should look at as we move forward to ensure everything is in place. Every government wants to ensure that taxpayers are getting the best value for money, but we want to keep on the topic at hand today as well.