That's a very good point, Mr. Chairman.
In fact, when we look at the contracts as they're listed there and the categories against which they're listed, I think the first thing that strikes us is how inappropriate the names of those categories are. For example, in the case of the $407-million secure channel contract, that was to provide technology support. It was the actual infrastructure—the pipes, the technology, and the networking—that provided secure Internet access and secure communications for the Government of Canada.
For example, IBM or Allstream...that's telephone services, networking services for telephones in government. A CGI contract would be for the provision of support and services—hardware and software—and maintenance. A lot of these things are labelled as management consulting, and we are in fact quite shocked at how these categorizations work. We would like them to better reflect what it is they do. All of the large contracts in that list are for large, managed services having to do with technology that is being provided, whether it's networking or hardware.
If you'd like more information, I'm sure Grant could give you more on what these things actually are, but they are not what you would consider to be individual management consultants. You'll often have the hardware, the software, the services, and the support.