The information that was provided to the committee was helpful. The fact that we went from 577 employees down to 547 employees over the 10 years shows that there was a gradual reduction in the number of staff we could have. There was an erosion, if you will, in our ability to maintain staffing levels.
As we worked through that 10-year period, we saw an inability to invest in some modernization on the IT front. We also saw discretionary audits having to be scaled back. We always had to do the financial work; it was in our performance audit work that we had to reduce the numbers.
What does that mean? It means that at a fundamental level, committees such as this one don't have as much material from our office to hold government to account on the services it provides and the money that is spent.