Thank you.
The government has laid excellent groundwork to improve financial management and internal controls by having senior people in the financial shop who have the financial competency to support all of that.
There are several aspects here. In terms of the internal control, there are plans under way. We will assess them, know what the gaps are, and then we can have an action plan to remediate them. If they are following their timeline—we're so close to 2012-13 anyway—then we're probably on a good track.
On the risk management side, there needs to be an appreciation that when we talk about corporate risk profile, it is more than financial risk. Earlier there was a question about whether we would have better risk management if we had more people with an accounting designation. Well, risk management is broader than the financial risk. It has to take into consideration the strategic risk, environmental risk, operational risk, and program risk, which are beyond financial risk. The two elements are not necessarily lined up, and we're not talking about apples and apples here.
But what we saw with the professionalization of the chief financial officer were some on-the-ground differences. They're participating more in strategic discussions. For example, if we talk to deputy heads, they say that they have a financial adviser who understands the program they run but who also has the financial wherewithal to give the right kind of advice when they talk about resource allocation and prioritization.
I think we've got the groundwork laid to help build on improving controls and financial management, and supporting this management.