I'd be speculating if I wanted to answer your question directly. However, we did note that it is unusual that there was no correspondence on file. One thing we've noted in this and many other practice reviews is the lack of documentation. It sounds administrative in nature, but it is the bedrock of demonstrating many of the tenets of public procurement. How can you be fair, open and transparent if you cannot demonstrate any of those aspects?
Again, documentation is something that you'll hear from me very many times this evening, but it's a legitimate concern, not only in ArriveCAN but in public procurement in general.