Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Weber, you seemed to want to reply to one of Mr. Allen's comments. You felt that you got all the things on the table? That's good. I'm happy to hear that.
When we talk about frameworks and whatnot, it seems to me that part of the reason is to deal with the complexities that Mr. Woodworth had raised, to deal with some of the matters that Mr. Falk raised as well, making sure you don't end up going down the wrong path and delivering something to CIC or to another agency that was unintended.
I also think it's important to take a step back and look at that yes, it's getting more and more complicated, but it is possible to deliver a very good project on time and on budget, and all those things, and to have one or two people or a small team to check off all the internal controls. But I do take the Auditor General's point that there's considerable risk to that. I would think that if someone got sick or if the team disbanded and there were unanswered questions long after that team had disbanded, that's why there are these these frameworks, so that you can come before a parliamentary committee like this, and answer questions and say that the taxpayers are getting all the things they're supposed to.
I certainly appreciate it. With 90,000 people coming across our borders every day, I'm glad there are people like you who are able to take that on.
I also had a question on page 18, the same page that Mr. Allen did. It's in paragraph 5.57.
Since May 2014, the Information, Science and Technology Branch introduced a new process to monitor project performance using a technique known as earned value management reporting....
I hadn't heard of this. Could you please give me an idea of what this technique is? What is it intended to do in light of the Auditor General's concerns?