Thank you, Chair.
Thank you very much for your presentation. It was fascinating. There are so many different directions in which to go.
Let me just pick up on the $6.81. I appreciated where you were coming from and I could understand the impracticality of it, almost the national embarrassment. It just makes us look small time, petty, and for the most part we don't expect to be, and we aren't, treated that way when we travel anywhere. So I understand that part of it.
But the flip side of this issue is this. If the Auditor General chose to go in and do a review and one of the strongest criticisms was that over and over and over again the responsible person, up to and including the deputy minister, allowed clear guidelines to just be ignored, we'd be up in arms. What is it about a clearly defined allowance, spelled out in black and white, that a deputy minister doesn't seem to understand or can't impose on the people he or she supervises?
Where do we get that balance? Do you build it in by providing the deputy with the flexibility? Is it just the lack of a mandate to say, within $20 to $50, in certain cases, the deputy can waive it so that we don't have what appears to be petty? How do we deal with that?