Understood.
Those relevant sections of the Financial Administration Act that describe what particular activities are being offered to Parliament in terms of description versus what it's authorizing, do you have something for me on that? Specifically, I'm referring to section 28, part 3, public disbursements:
Where an appropriation is made for any purpose in any Act of Parliament for granting to Her Majesty any sum of money to defray expenses of the federal public administration for a fiscal year, no payment shall be made pursuant to that appropriation out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund unless a warrant, prepared on the order of the Governor in Council, has been signed by the Governor General authorizing expenditures to be charged against the appropriation...
Also, section 27,
All estimates of expenditures submitted to Parliament shall be in respect of payments during the fiscal year to which the estimates relate and expenditures that will be incurred during that fiscal year.
In terms of public disbursements, the Financial Administration Act is fairly clear that what is described to Parliament must, indeed, be held to account, and if it's not described to Parliament it's not lawful. Is that not a fair representation of the act?