On this particular chapter, there was a difference of opinion between the Auditor General and the representatives from DND. The Auditor General was saying there were serious security lapses, and DND was saying there weren't. The Auditor General was saying there were financial consequences because of those security lapses, and the department officials were saying no, there weren't, as a consequence of that.
The Auditor General's said she would provide us with additional details supporting her point of view. Have those come to the committee? You had referenced that someone from DND had perhaps misspoken. Is it on this particular issue that the official had misspoken?