Similar to what happens in the private sector, usually what the auditors do is provide room for improvement and provide pointers to help management consider areas in which to make changes, so that the systems and the controls can be better the next time around.
The financial audit and the public accounts audit are reporting at different levels. If we look at a particular scenario, the revenue stream or an expenditure stream, and notice that there are some shortcomings, then we would form a view as to how serious they are.
If there is something really quite serious, to the point that we would consider it a significant deficiency, we would take it to what we consider the signatories. We have an exit meeting with the four signatories: they are the deputy minister of Finance, the deputy receiver general, the comptroller general, and the secretary of the Treasury Board. We would report to them that these are some of the weaknesses they really should know about, that are pan-government or significant enough that at the centre they really should know.
The next level down would be issues that are not as significant; for example, some of the issues relating to National Defence that you see in part here. The audit team that audits the Department of National Defence would provide a management letter. We would write to the deputy minister indicating that as a result of doing the audit—not that we go out to specifically assess controls—we notice that there are some areas they should or could improve upon.