So, their situation is not very positive.
Let us come back to the report of the Auditor General. I question the seriousness of the Department of Indian affairs and Northern development. I know that there are many issues to take into consideration, from birth to death, with social factors, education, etc. It would seem that we're managing people's lives in those fields.
Is staff turnover higher at Indian Affairs than in other departments? Would that make the follow-up more difficult? I know that other departments do not deal with matters affecting Indians but would initiatives implemented by Indian Affairs cost more than those of other departments? Does staff turnover have an effect on the way Indian Affairs executes its mandate?