Thank you.
Thank you for this question, Mrs. Vignola.
As the president mentioned, the vote has existed in the tool kit for many years as an essential vote to provide for government-wide initiatives.
It all depends on which initiatives are coming forward. If you look at what's been supported, it's indigenous, early learning and child care. In this case, there are application modernization initiatives that Mr. McCauley mentioned. There's support for Phoenix damages that have been identified. These are instances in which Treasury Board authority is given for supporting the initiative, but we don't know exactly which vote it's going to end up in because a lot of times it's demand-driven. A lot of times there's a payment, or a partial payment, that's required before the next appropriation act is set out.
Transparency is provided, just as for any other initiative, so that parliamentarians can ask the questions they wish to in order to get more information. As items are allocated from that vote, it is reported online as we table the next estimates document. In this case Mr. McCauley mentioned, I think, $3 million to $4 million for the application modernization initiative.
The other thing to point out on that question is that there are many departments involved in that initiative. When authorities are provided for new funding, they're given to those departments, irrespective of a point in time where they are in a certain lapse forecast. Lapse forecasts change all the time, so it would be inappropriate for a government, or a parliament, to keep approving funds with inappropriate information on what the financial situation of a government is.
We have “The Fiscal Monitor” that provides information on an ongoing basis. We have loads of financial reporting that provides this information, so it is simply one of many departments in that initiative.