To your earlier question first, and then back to where Bill left off, you asked what would be different in the new system. I will talk about what would be different for you.
When we come forward with the estimates, instead of having it by portfolio of ministry with this amount for operating and that amount for capital and this amount for grants and contributions, we would, in Fisheries and Oceans, for example, be asking you to approve dollar amounts for safe and secure waters, for economically prosperous maritime sectors and fisheries, etc., using the strategic outcomes and program activity model. Then you could go straight into those departmental reports on plans and priorities and see them drilled down, at a greater level of detail, into the specific program activities, so your approvals would actually be fully aligned with that other information that is more directly linked to program activities and results, as opposed to type of expenditure.
The only streamlining is in that cascading. I'm not sure there would be any savings in this, in that we still need to maintain a good sense of what is being spent in terms of operating, capital, and standard expenditures. We also have a number of issues we'd want to explore with respect to how we would go, but that is fundamentally what would be different for you. You wouldn't be going out saying, “We approved x billion in operating”; you'd be saying, “Wow, we've just approved an investment in safe, secure waters”.