I'm not sure that the rigidity always provides benefits. It's a matter of degree. One thing it provides, or has provided, is a level of transparency. With all the checks and balances, one has a better sense of what is going on with the procurement. This was the reaction to the Hillier era wave of sole-sourcing; we had to put something in place that gives the public a better sense that these things are being looked at carefully.
It provides some reassurance, but it is easy to go overboard. I think the case has been made by others that we've reached that point. When you look at the air projects that were done by ACANS, where the government essentially sole-sourced, it's hard to say that those procurements are worse than ones that had an extensive competitive process.