I'd like to answer that question, if you don't mind.
Clearly, a good many programs or initiatives proposed to Parliament in the supplementary estimates are new. Normally, in year two, proposed funding for these initiatives would be set out in the Main Estimates. As the report indicates, it's true that some programs are funded for a set period of time or years, for example, for five years. Therefore, there is some uncertainty. A government may have decided to invest a certain amount of money in a program and after a number of years, an audit or evaluation is done to see if the problem or needs still exists and if the program is still working.
Clearly, from the standpoint of departmental managers, there is some uncertainty. However, the government made a decision for a specific reason. To our way of thinking, if decisions are based on better information and if Cabinet decisions target specific areas, then the government, Parliament or a department are better able to judge whether a program should be maintained or whether or funding for that program should be increased.