Thanks, Dan. There are a couple of things, and I think you made a good point.
It's actually bad in terms of governance, financial governance and accounting, to book savings when it's unclear where those savings will come from. Again, it was done in part to contribute to this notional or illusory surplus on the eve of an election.
Ultimately, as the PBO indicated, the $900 million may or may not have been delivered. Beyond that, this was subject to a court challenge. Before a court challenge is recognized, it is questionable to book the savings. I believe it's bad from a financial governance perspective, and it's also bad from a labour relations perspective.
Again, from our perspective, I would say that the work done with the public sector unions and Treasury Board officials on the issue of mental health and wellness has been really good work. The report that was delivered, I believe in 2016, by the joint council of Treasury Board as the employer and the unions was actually commissioned by the previous Conservative government under Tony Clement. I would give them credit. They recognized it at that time.
All I'm saying, colleagues, is that there were things they did that were constructive, including commissioning that report. Tony Clement, as president of the Treasury Board at that time, started that process. It created a very good report, and one on which we are acting. We are moving forward to create a centre for diversity, inclusion, and wellness, including a big focus on mental health and wellness out of that.
We want to do more in terms of employee wellness. We believe that the current regime is not doing enough for large parts of our public service, including young public servants who may have chronic serious illnesses or injury. Beyond that, we want to do more on mental health as we move forward, and to be a progressive employer in these areas of health and wellness.