I guess I'll say that I wish it were easy to put a dollar number on every part of an audit. That's what we struggle with. For example, we did an audit a while back on Border Services, and I think we identified at the time that about 700,000 people had come into Canada without showing a passport or without the agents recording a passport or other identification for those individuals. I don't know where it is now, but I'm assuming that the Border Services Agency has tightened that up, and that if you went in and looked now there would be, hopefully, an indication of who actually came across the border in every case.
Well, how do you put a dollar value on something like that? That's the hard part of this. I'll go back to our audits of the financial statements of the Government of Canada. Again I'm not sure exactly how much it costs us, but it's the most expensive audit that we do, the audit of the financial statements of the Government of Canada. We'll have a hearing on that when we do the public accounts hearing. If we were not doing that, what would be the impact? In the course of that audit, we find some things but we don't find a lot of things, because over time proper internal controls have been put in place to manage money. Yes, we will find things, but they will be much less than what it costs us to do the audit. Again, how do you put a value on the deterrent effect of having us come in and do that audit?
There are times when we have audits and we do find actual places where dollars can be saved, and that then puts a focus on it. But a lot of our audits actually, quite frankly, do result in the government ending up spending money in order to fix something. I wish there was an easy way to put a simple return on investment number on them, but I haven't figured it out yet.