I just wanted to clarify, because whenever I hear stipulations being placed—subject to this, subject to that—I will note that the power of committees to send for documents is without restriction. I did want to clarify that, so we look forward to receiving that information when it is finished.
Now, I have about a couple of minutes left. I want to go back a little bit in time, because there's an interesting quirk of history. The last time you appeared before this committee it was dealing with another energy and clean energy issue when you were the deputy minister of NRCan, dealing with a period between 2003 and 2005 when the former Liberal government came under conflict of interest challenges, and that's in an AG report. It was written that:
Before signing the five contribution agreements, NRCan knew that a consultant who had provided services to the Department relating to the contribution programs would also be working for the organizations that received NRCan funding under these programs. In our view, [the AG's view] this is a conflict of interest that NRCan did not identify.
Payments totalling about $3.2 million that NRCan made under the contribution agreement with CEEA Transport were not in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement.
Now granted, you were not the deputy minister at the time that the Liberal government was undertaking this program, but you were the deputy minister when the audit came out. I'm just looking at these two AG reports, looking at these conflicts of interest.
Why is it, Ms. Doyle, that SDTC was able to operate under such terrible conflict of interest challenges when we've seen these challenges happening before with a former Liberal government? Why did this happen once again with the Liberals back in power, going back to their old ways of allowing these conflicts of interest to get back into the play of things, with money going to friends, going to those who are in conflicts of interest?
Why did this happen from your expert view?