Thank you very much for that.
I think the two issues you are concerned about are forecasting and our ability to predict where we're going in the future. The DNA area has been particularly troublesome for us, simply because of the demand. It's a very powerful forensic technique for law enforcement; hence, the demand for it is increasing all the time. We recognize that we do not have expertise in that area, and we are taking the Auditor General's recommendation to bring in outside experts to assist us with that activity.
But we have done fairly reasonably in our other areas—toxicology and firearms—where we have placed people and reduced the turnaround times. This is because we understand those areas and the demand for them far better than DNA; each day, it seems, we get more demands for the use of DNA that we haven't even thought of.
With regard to project management, in 2003 we recognized that the organization was growing so quickly that we had to put in a project management office, and we installed one at that time. I believe the issue the Auditor General was concerned about was that the senior manager—that is me—would sign off on a project at the beginning, assuring that the funding was available and that resources could be put to it and that there was a project plan in place, but that I wouldn't subsequently sign off on the project when it was finished. That was a weakness on our part in the project management area. We had made the assumption that a sign-off at the scientific level was sufficient. We accept that recommendation and will improve in that particular area.