Absolutely. I understand the things you're trying to draw. I was talking from my experience. There is also a provincial Auditor General who has Auditor General functions. The distinction between an Auditor General and an ombudsman is the following; an Auditor General conducts an audit of the money trail as well as conducts other accounting functions, such as value-for-money auditing. So think of the Auditor General as the paper trail. An ombudsman makes the decision. They look at the administrative decisions that are made with that money. That's the distinction, and it's an important distinction.
The function of an ombudsman would be to look at day-to-day policies and decisions and determine whether they are just, equitable, reasonable, or plain wrong. That's what my statute gives. You're completing the tag team. If you only have an Auditor General, which is what you have federally, you have a great ability to track money--we've all followed very closely what happened in the big Auditor General investigation that led to the Gomery commission--but you never follow the administrative decisions that were made with that money. You were looking at the misappropriation of funds and so on. That's the distinction between both. An Auditor General can co-exist very well with an ombudsman. I think both functions are complementary.