First of all, I think you're correct on the years in question. Certainly for the years 2003-04 and beyond, when I was in charge of the Firearms Centre, we did not seek supplementary estimates, because we certainly did not plan to ever exceed our budget in any respect.
But the core of your question is absolutely right. It's a duty of the deputy head of an agency, if it looks like we're not going to have sufficient funds in the appropriation, to pursue with the minister a supplementary estimate. We were prepared to do so, had we concluded that one was necessary.
I come back to your earlier observation. It's correct that at a point in time in early January, I felt, based on the advice I had received from accounting specialists, including the Comptroller General's office, that a supplementary estimate was required, but that pre-dated the involvement of the Department of Justice and many others in reviewing what was the actual extent of the debt or liability.