Thank you. I'll speak to the second question first.
It would pain me to stop doing the follow-up reviews. You used the word “accountability”, and that's really what the follow-up reviews bring. The challenge is that there's nothing mandatory in my legislation that requires me to do the follow-ups. However, I am required to review complaints, I am required to do systemic reviews when reasonable grounds exist and I do have to offer ADR services.
Unfortunately, in the prioritization, that would be one of the first things to go. As someone who speaks about accountability, it would be incredibly awkward for me to come before the committee and not be able to speak with confidence and say that recommendations have or have not been successfully implemented. That's what the follow-up reviews are meant to do.
The first part of your question is about training and resources and the shifting of the part-time or temporary resources. Training is a significant part of our office, and everyone sees that as a necessary component of their time at our office. We want to see them grow within our office. We see that there's an increased sophistication in work, and they are excited by that as well, so they fully buy into the training component.
We hadn't experienced significant turnover until the workload became onerous, and then it became a work-life balance issue. Even though people really enjoy the work, there are other places where they can also enjoy the work and have a better work-life balance. Training, obviously, is important. The world of procurement is constantly changing, so we need to be able to stay current with the issues.