Public Accounts committee  Mr. Goodfellow was accountable for working with departments for the 2004 process; he was not accountable for the 2002 process, so it would depend—

Public Accounts committee  We provided it in the material that we provided, I believe.

Public Accounts committee  I do agree with it. I agree that the business volumes were inaccurate. There's no question about that.

Public Accounts committee  I think in retrospect, yes, it probably would have. Had they known their correct volumes, and assuming that information was not available to others, yes, it would have caused them to price--

Public Accounts committee  Mr. Chair, the information in terms of the 2002 and the pilot...the program was changing in terms of the estimated business volumes. As well, the second process, in 2004, was 18 months after the 2002 contract. It was based on, as I said, the best information the departments had

Public Accounts committee  In hindsight, we agree with the Auditor General that the actual volumes were available. What I am trying to stress with the committee, Mr. Chair, is that when we sought confirmation from departments that these were the correct business volumes--and they would have that informatio

Public Accounts committee  Perhaps, Mr. Chair, Mr. Goodfellow can walk you through the analysis.

Public Accounts committee  That's a correct conclusion. Holding all things equal, and not getting into speculation on what would have changed, what could have changed, that's a correct conclusion.

Public Accounts committee  Mr. Chair, could I seek a clarification? I believe the question was on the 2002 process. To make sure the facts are correct, I'll mention that Mr. Goodfellow was not involved in the 2002 process; Mr. Goodfellow oversaw the 2004 process. That was part of the—

Public Accounts committee  David Pyett was accountable for the 2002 process.

Public Accounts committee  Mr. Chair, this goes to a fundamental question with respect to accountabilities. We sought the information from the departments that would have had the program requirements and would have understood how the program requirements would change in the future. This was validated with

Public Accounts committee  What I said, Mr. Chair, was that the RCMP was apprised of this investigation. The conclusion was that there was no criminal wrongdoing.

Public Accounts committee  Yes, Mr. Chair, that is correct.

Public Accounts committee  I would think he would be expected back the week after next, all things equal.

Public Accounts committee  As a point of clarification, Mr. Chair, I just want to make sure that.... I am not aware that were complaints during the 2004 RFP process. There were certainly questions, but I take it that the question—