It's a question of two things. It's a question of information provided to Parliament versus the vote structure. You now have a world where planned spending by program in 2013-14 is available and departments must explain in a narrative any changes in plans versus actual. That exists regardless of what you base your vote structure on. So you have that in play.
If the question is whether a program-based vote would have solved this problem, the answer is no, it would not have, because in that particular case you are taking some existing programs and adding money to them.
The best example I can give you is if you had stand-alone programs for that, it would have stood out, but where you are adding money to existing programs, that money wouldn't necessarily be tracked. Moving to a program-based model would not have solved that problem. What you need is better tracking of horizontal spending.
If the question is whether the program-based model would have prevented the $3.1 billion, the answer is no, it wouldn't have.