Thank you.
Your report states that the documents contained in the files of the Treasury Board Secretariat are authoritative. That means that you were opposed to this decision. I'll use your evidence to put my question to Mr. St-Jean. You said that your position and your recommendation were not followed.
Mr. St-Jean, your predecessor has documents establishing that he was opposed to the decision to give the Department of Justice more money. The Auditor General stated that, in her view, these accounting errors were fundamental and flagrant.
In your evidence, you mentioned that one key aspect of the question was that costs had been incurred under an agreement in principle, rather than a proper contract. The Auditor General has just told us that was secondary and you're nodding your head... Am I mistaken? Pardon me.
Since your predecessor and the Treasury Board Secretariat of Canada have documents asserting that this makes no sense, and since the Governor General has concluded that these are fundamental and obvious accounting errors, why ask the department—which is to receive more money—whether it is entitled to receive any?