That's fair. I guess the point I'm getting at is that certainly, if there are legitimate reasons, one wouldn't hold that against the management team. It's just that there are those occasions—admittedly rare, not the rule but the exception—when it's just extremely frustrating, I'm sure as much for you as for the committee, to see individuals come in who've completely ignored it. They haven't taken any action. If you don't have a cause-and-effect relationship, it's hard to see how it's going to change.
My last question—I realize that time is running short—has to do with something within the supplementary information of the performance report. It lists the performance audits that were completed in 2006 and 2007. It notes that five performance audits were cancelled. I didn't immediately see why those audits were cancelled.
More generally, what would be some of the reasons why a performance audit, once undertaken, would be cancelled?