I believe that the intent at the time was to ensure that we had enough flexibility to adapt the requirements to a virus that was changing very quickly and was requiring some expanded responses for which we needed to use the services of KPMG to help deliver.
As you'll recall, at the time the contracts were initially entered into, we were not sure how long the pandemic would last. We did not know if there would be waves or if those waves would be seasonal. We were monitoring the entry of new variants. Initially there was not an expectation, I think, on our part that we were entering into many years of successive responses, and the responses were being built incrementally.
In terms of the need to ensure continuity of high-quality services, a decision was taken to add some broader categories to the contract. We take the Auditor General's finding and recommendation that it is not a best practice and that we should be as specific as possible to ensure value for money, but I do believe that the decision to create broader taskings was designed to allow for that agility and responsiveness in terms of the work that needed to be done.