Public Accounts committee  It's $2.6 billion. That's what we've calculated for four years, 2017-18, and $900 million-a-year after that. So it's $2.6 billion divided by four.

Public Accounts committee  That's the amount that I work with.

Public Accounts committee  These are highly specialized staff, as you can imagine, unlike say, staffing or classification, whom you'd find in every department across government. These are very specialized people. We have just recently made some significant hires and continue to do so, but it is one of the areas in the economy where people who are this good at this type of issue are in high demand.

Public Accounts committee  It's ongoing and constant with all the players around this table. I doubt there's a single week, and maybe even a single day of the year, where there isn't at least one conversation amongst those of us around the table.

Public Accounts committee  One of the things that's happened in my 25 years of public service is that pensions have suddenly become cool, and attracting people to work in pensions is way easier than it was before.

Public Accounts committee  I would just say I think it's important to differentiate between the evidence around the decisions we did make and the decisions we didn't make. The assumptions that support the decisions that we did make are assumptions largely based on the work of the Chief Actuary, and those actuarial assumptions are available in various reports.

Public Accounts committee  We were quite comfortable doing that. Having said that, there's always room for improvement in something as important as this. But we did it, and we did it quite willingly.

Public Accounts committee  Absolutely yes, and we'll set up a committee to work on that.

Public Accounts committee  Absolutely. We'll be able to do that. We hope to have our first meeting this summer.

Public Accounts committee  One of the key things is looking at governance. Later this fiscal year, or at the beginning of the next fiscal year, we want to make sure we've done a good benchmarking study. We want to look at other similar players around the world to see what the best practices are in governance.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you very much for the question. Under the existing legislation, there is already a requirement that the plan be invested in a way that it works towards the goals that are set by the chief actuary—in this case, 4.1%—in a way that doesn't bring undue risk to the fund. We recognize that we need to go beyond that and do a funding plan.

Public Accounts committee  If we are talking about the way that we evaluate our risks and the actuarial impact on the funds, I would say that this work is done by the Chief Actuary. He works closely with us over each three-year valuation period. As for the question on the period before 2000, when we did not have a fund as we did for the period after 2000, my colleague from the Department of Finance would best be able to speak to the government's approach.

Public Accounts committee  Absolutely. The entire reason for moving to 50-50, and to changing the terms of the plan to change the retirement age to 65, was exactly to ensure their sustainability going forward.

Public Accounts committee  We work very closely with all plans together, and as Mr. Valentini pointed out in his remarks, they invest all the funds for these three plans: RCMP, Canadian Forces, and ourselves.

Public Accounts committee  Yes, it did, and in fairness to the Auditor General's comments, we shared over 400 documents and three Treasury Board submissions. We held 13 meetings lasting 19 hours; 32 of our staff engaged with them over time. There would have been hundreds if not thousands of phone calls and e-mails on this front, but there are some things under the orders in council from 1985 and 2006 that we are not able to share because they are cabinet confidences.