So then your department is going to look for the actual $146 million that went missing. That's not your role.
In audits completed in 1984, 1987, 1992, 1994, 1998, and so on, the same problem kept recurring. The buying of major capital equipment procurement has been an ongoing Achilles heel for the defence department.
The Office of the Auditor General has reported over the years on the acquisition process. You've said today, as well, that it's unnecessarily complex, process-driven, costly, and generally inappropriate for the management of the defence capital program. With this in mind, will the ACAN acquisition process be significantly different, from the perspective of these criticisms? ?