It was interesting. I wasn't the only one under oath on the stand last spring. The senior official at Indian Affairs, Ms. Johnston, was called to testify under oath about the funding arrangement for child welfare. I've recreated a portion of her testimony on page 9. It's publicly available.
Ms. Johnston was in charge of the division of INAC that was responsible for preparing the responses to the Auditor General's recommendations in the 2008 report. She was asked whether or not she was aware if the Auditor General of Canada had any concerns about their funding arrangements. She said she wasn't sure.
This is the senior departmental official who heads the division responsible for implementing the Auditor General's concerns. Under oath in testimony, she admits she is unaware of whether or not the Auditor General has concerns, let alone what the recommendations are.
In other testimony, she said she was not aware of the national policy review done in 2000, other than that it existed. She was not sure what the recommendations were. When asked similarly about the expert review funded by the department in 2005, she could not speak to the recommendations. She just knew it flowed from the 2000 report.
In my view it's hard for bureaucrats to implement the recommendations if, under oath, senior officials in the department—those who are supposed to be experts advising the minister—are not aware of the contents of those reports and the recommendations.