I do have one other question and a couple of comments.
Mr. Leswick, thank you for being here today. You've been in that department for many years, I guess. I recall that when I was minister in that department you were there, and we appreciate your being here today.
You and I and most people understand the budget consultation process and the budget. Thank you for your comments bringing us around to how this works. Thank you for explaining to us that the Auditor General's office supplied a business case, as it also did in 2011, as to exactly how this money would be spent. As you know, in 2011 we were in a global recession and all departments were asked to take a look at their spending and their budgets, as there was a deficit reduction action plan in place then.
We found out today from Mr. Arseneault's question that the Auditor General's office is included as one of those departments. I was not fully aware of that. I thought there was something different there with the Auditor General's office. Perhaps that's one area. The reason I say this is that I do know that as they make their budget requests, there's also some back and forth. At that time, it was Minister Flaherty going back and forth with the Auditor General as to whether or not you could indeed continue with these audits. There was the assurance that they could indeed. We have the letter. We knew that at that time Mr. Ferguson and the Auditor General's office said that they wanted to be team players, that all of the departments were doing this, and that they could do this without cutting audits.
Also, Mr. Christopherson brought up today the fact that the Treasury Board president, Mr. Clement, wrote a letter to the Auditor General saying that before this went through, he wanted to know whether there was going to be a reduction in the plan. He was given an assurance that there wasn't.
Mr. Ricard, did you receive that type of a letter from the Treasury Board president in the last budget?