The bad-news answer is this: I wouldn't suggest that what you said is accurate for this specific purpose, in the sense that we saw identifiable issues in relatively small-scale procurements. There are certainly lessons to be learned, and there are certain departments that are particularly good at certain things. IRCC, for example, has excellent documentation protocols that could be mimicked. The RCMP also has a certain oversight functionality of aspects of their procurement processes that can catch some of those errors early on. It's a dangerous question: How much oversight is enough without creating an additional burden?
I heard previous witnesses talk about the risk-based approach. I strongly believe that is the right mechanism to continue to pursue, in terms of defence procurement.
The one thing I will soften is this: Regarding the list I read, I have to be careful to note that those are my ideas, not my recommendations. I did not do a review of defence procurement. Those are ideas I've had that I've brought forward from other reviews I've done. They could be useful as you study defence procurement.