Thank you for the question.
One of my roles is certainly to oversee various processes, starting from due diligence processes up to administrative investigations into the department. It's also to put together a framework of preventative, detective and reactive measures for any information that is brought to our attention that may suggest we have issues in the processes, up to wrongdoing.
We're taking that information. We have multiple teams that are working on that. We're taking this information seriously. We validate first whether the allegation has some other evidence that will support it. When we reach that first step and we think there's enough material to trigger an administrative investigation, we do so.
We have a great team of internal investigators within the departments who are going through all the information they have. Upon completion, they issue a report to confirm or inform if the allegation was proven to be right or if there was nothing to be seen. As soon as we identify some element of criminality, we refer those elements to the RCMP in order for them to decide if they will launch a criminal investigation into the matter.
As was also discussed, upon completion of a thorough analysis that demonstrates that we have been overcharged or overbilled—that there was some element for which we have paid too much—we have the ability to recover the funds from the suppliers, and it's in our regular practice to do so.
It's important for us to take all of that information—the outcome of those reports and the great recommendations that have been made—to make sure that we understand even after that what we can change and improve to make that framework of prevention, detection and reaction even more efficient in order to avoid the repetition of such events.
In a nutshell, that is one of the responsibilities under my area.