The audit is a follow-up to a previous audit, so we would have expected there would have been movement in terms of responding to some of the recommendations, more central support, more guidance, and that the results would be better. The report does carry a more negative tone when we do enter into analyzing some of the initiatives and find they were lacking in many cases. That's the tone of the report in terms of saying why it was not as encouraging as we would like to have seen.
For the points that were made about doing the analysis later, we would want to see that the analysis was completed before you take those policy decisions. If they haven't done that, finishing them off, or doing more after the fact, is not necessarily a negative point from my perspective. I think it still helps the program to understand whether they should change course, or whether, as they modify policy requirements as they move forward with policy renewal, they have more information to go on to align their program. That part we would not consider as a negative point.
All in all, they should be considering it before the decisions are taken.