First, I think we need to define what horizontal governance is, because in my annual report we have a whole chapter on that. We did publish other works in this area and we also reviewed existing work. What we found is that there are different definitions. So this is a problem.
We gave ourselves a definition. What we mean by that is not necessarily that you manage a company or a department together. What we mean by horizontal governance of official languages refers to the mechanism put in place to ensure ongoing cooperation among departments.
Let's talk about the federal institutions themselves. This is a horizontal file. It's not about transport; it's not about heritage. It goes across all those departments—and how, as a government, will you achieve a consistent approach and really focus on results?—and then evidently, between departments and civil society.
We already have concrete examples of horizontal mechanisms in place. For example, in the area of health, there are proven mechanisms. In that area, there are two committees—community and departmental—that focus on the issue, develop a plan, address the priorities, and together they more or less develop a plan of action, allocate resources, and assess the results.
I could go on. In immigration we have the same thing. This type of cooperation between communities, the stakeholders, and the government has allowed, for example, the federal government to sign agreements with the provinces with linguistic clauses that take into account the specificity of the official language minority communities.
Since the federal government was tuned in on the communities, it was easier for the government to also establish a dialogue with the provinces on those communities. The same thing happened with the early childhood file.
So I think that is the mechanism we are pushing for and the results at which we are aiming.
Have I answered your question?