This leads me to the next point, which is also talked about in the report. It talks about deadlines given to some of this and criteria being laid out around it. One of the criteria was said ad nauseam by all folks, in all areas, including parliamentarians, and that was “shovel ready”, which really became.... If somebody would have hit somebody with that shovel, it might have been more appropriate to stop those shovel ready comments.
But what the Auditor General is saying is that indeed some weren't, but then they got approvals. So you can imagine someone like me, who was sitting as the chair of corporate services of a small municipality that had a major project it wanted to do and, because of the timelines, needed to accept the risk, but couldn't. Then we find out later through an audit that programs that weren't ready got accepted after the fact. You can imagine how that municipal council must feel. They would be asking why they didn't just throw theirs back in the mix as well, because they weren't really ready either, and now we have approval processes after the fact.
Again, do you have any sense of how many happened...? I'd expect that it's only a few, but nonetheless, that wasn't the criteria that were laid out and communicated across the country when the program was rolled out.