Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to return to an area that Mr. Sweet raised. That would take us to page 85, paragraph 2.82. I'm back on the supplementary estimates.
The report states: “Our review shows that items reappear for different reasons such as for ongoing programs without a permanent source of funding”. The overarching concern about this is that supplementary estimates are being used because politically often it's easier to get something through there than it is through the mains, because there isn't as much attention at the time. So on this notion that programs are being put forward when there's no permanent source of funding, if that's happening on a regular basis, that has to be problematic.
Then the report states that different projects are being submitted each year under the same title. The third piece is that those are reappearing year after year, when most of your argument is about timing—surprise—and things that are out of your control. If the Auditor General is finding things coming up year after year, that suggests a real weakness in the process, not legitimate reasons for the exercise of supplementaries.
Whoever is interested can answer.