Thank you, Chair.
To build on that, Mr. Smith mentioned that it is a three-year profile. In the way this profile ramps up over time in terms of savings, the ultimate savings are $5.2 billion. Budget 2012 forecast $1.5 billion in the current year, $3.1 billion in the second, up to $5.1 billion in the third, and $5.2 billion ongoing. That's the buildup. It is a three-year period.
In supplementary estimates (B), we come to Parliament with an appropriation act when we need to increase what departments are going to spend. It's an “up to” amount; we don't come to Parliament to reduce an appropriation amount. When you think about why you're not seeing some of these reductions in the supplementary estimates (B), it's that we only come here if there's an increase.
The member mentioned two votes in particular. The reason we're coming for one of those votes is that we have terminable allowances, which are allowances paid to employees for things such as recruitment and retention that are being transferred into departmental reference levels.
It's an unfortunate name, “terminable allowances”. It has nothing to do with termination. It's actually a supplement to encourage retention and recruitment in job categories in which we have some issues.
That's why we're here and why you're seeing an increase in that number. It has nothing to do with the actual reductions that were spoken about in the House.
One final point is that you asked a question about the various categories of employees who had been affected by the reductions. There are three categories, as the member mentioned.
I'm going from memory, but of the roughly 2,200 people who have been impacted and have taken those options, my recollection is that 1,500 have gone for transitional support or education allowance; the other 700 have elected to wait for the year and be on surplus status.
That's the rough breakdown of what we've seen so far. These numbers will be updated as we go through this process. It is a three-year process.