Thank you, all, for presenting to us.
We had questions last week regarding Housing, Infrastructure and Communities. They told us, basically, that Mr. Mills with PSPC would have to answer some of those questions.
Ms. Boudreau—or maybe it was Ms. Tattersall—said that there is a list and there is a percentage they have on the government buildings. My main question is going back to what my colleagues have asked.
There's no incentive here for the departments to actually make the cuts. It was said that there are 28 custodian departments and the departments are going to be responsible for determining what is vacant and not. It seems to me, Mr. Mills, that you guys are going to responsible for saying that you've actually done something.
How do we square this circle between saying there aren't really good measurables and they don't have incentives on the departments, yet you have to figure out where they're going to be cutting to make progress?
I don't know what recommendations you have for us, using a stick or an incentive to make the departments come to the same conclusion. I do believe it's something to do with your standardized measurements, which are not there.
Can you tell us what other things you can do so that the departments have to follow through and then in a year's time or so...?
It sounds like you're the ones who are going to be responsible, even though the departments are the ones determining what is actually happening.