I take your point. The reports of an auditor general are always very focused in terms of giving us recommendations of a specific nature with regard to that particular audit. I do think there are ongoing improvements beyond the timing of those reports. Certainly in 2009 there were significant deficiencies found, and those were addressed, and they have continued to be addressed and improved over the time period, certainly in terms of the role the Privy Council Office plays in providing guidance and information and supporting ministers and departments with information about vacancies and the timeliness of making appointments. I hear you. I do think there are several opportunities throughout our work in departments, where we look for ways to improve. We do have internal audit processes in departments. We have our annual performance reports. I think those are opportunities where we also take stock of what taxpayer dollars we have spent on particular activities and what the results are, and we do seek to improve and find efficiencies in the way we do our work and the results we see.
There are sometimes delays, and there are sometimes things that don't get done as quickly as we would like, but in terms of the appointment process, I think that the Auditor General's findings certainly confirmed for us certain things that we were trying already to do better with regard to the full-time and leadership positions under the previous approach that were our responsibility. That's why, for example, I think, when they conducted the audit, they found very fulsome files and documentation about how we were supporting the process. That's something that was happening in between audit times. I think it is something that we as public servants are always concerned about, how taxpayer dollars are spent, and we're always looking to find efficiencies and improvements.