Maybe I could start, Mr. Chairman.
The first point I would like to make is that a lot of work was done on all of these things; none were completed. We tabled with this committee our business plan with a status report, as of February of last year, of what had been done on the items and what remained to be done. It was not a case of not moving on any of the items; a significant amount of work was done on all of them.
I think there are probably three things I would say. It risks sounding like an excuse, and I don't want it to, but I do think the Auditor General was right in observing that we made a fundamental mistake at the beginning in trying to work simultaneously on all the recommendations.
A number of those recommendations were very significant. They required a great deal of work, and they required a significant amount of cultural change within the organization. We tried to do everything at the same time. We did a lot of things; we didn't finish anything. I think that is one factor.
Second is that during that period the coast guard was also undergoing other significant changes, which took a significant amount of management time. The coast guard became a special operating agency within DFO; a portion of responsibilities for navigable waters and the Office of Boating Safety was transferred to Transport Canada.
As I think the committee appreciates, executing those sorts of issues does take a fair bit of time. We also were involved in significant internal review processes, particularly the expenditure review committee process.
I don't want to offer these as excuses, because they're not intended to be, but they are explanations for why management was not as focused on some of this as it should have been.