Can I just clarify on our recollection?
Our recollection is there was a meeting between one of my officials and one of Mr. St-Jean's people. There's no recollection that there was actually an agenda item on a meeting or that there was any particular attention paid to this. The whole discussion revolved around a $22 million accrual being set up in a general provision that totalled some $20 billion. So the amount was insignificant. A copy of the legal opinion was given, and I have a note that was issued the next day, which just said: “I reviewed the material, discussed the amount, and consider this an appropriate accrual.” We do not go back and audit appropriations. We don't give an opinion on that, so it is not part of the work we do. But it also says, “Note: amount of work was minimal but reasonable given the size of the accrual.” Therefore, it was basically a pass on that amount.
So there was not an extensive audit done of this, given that we were in the public accounts audit and this was what they called the forum where officials discuss large and significant issues just before we sign off on our opinion on the public accounts audit.