This is what we call vote 5. Vote 5 was supposed to be used for—I can't remember the exact wording—exceptional, unforeseen expenditures, or something of that nature. What we found was that in fact many almost recurring expenditures were going through vote 5. For example, much of the expenditure of the firearms system over the years was going through vote 5, and there were other expenditures like that.
We raised the question of what the definition of unforeseen exceptional expenses is. In fact, many of these expenses probably should have been back in the main estimates, not going through vote 5.
I know there were several studies that looked at this. The government gave, at the time, new directives to departments as to what was to go into vote 5. We haven't gone back to look at this, but my impression is that they had made quite a bit of improvement and had narrowed what actually could be charged to vote 5.