It's important to keep in mind that we were dealing with various departments, so many departments were part of that finding of the OAG. I can assure you that this is common. A procurement officer will ask questions, will shift, basically, and will provide advice to the client. If, for example, McKinsey was not qualified under a particular solution, it's normal to look at the requirement the client is trying to achieve to basically make sure we have the right instruments. I wouldn't want to draw inferences on that. I think it has to be put in that context.
On top of that, something we are asking our procurement officers to do much more is to challenge and to document. If a decision is made, we don't want to be in a situation where negative inferences are being drawn. We want to be able to document why that advice was provided and what the rationale was for it. We're putting the emphasis on a challenge function and challenging the client to make sure the reason they're doing a certain procurement strategy is the right one and it fulfills the obligations of transparency and fairness.