Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this increase that we're asking for here does cover the 2005-2006 fiscal year, but we have not made adjustments in the 2006-2007 fiscal year. After the work is done on reviewing this, doing some of the tracking of historical data there, we'll have a better idea of where we think we'll need to be and at that time come forward with a request for more funds if that's the case. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm just curious if we could explore the comments made by the Minister about the shortfalls made up by the departments. When was the signal to the Minister or the department of FMB about the shortage and the fact that they were covering it through alternative means? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Voytilla can provide that level of detail as the work around budget preparations when we had started to realize there was a shortfall. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Voytilla.

Thank you, Mr. Voytilla. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess if I could trouble them to restate, although they sort of answered this before, but if I could trouble the Minister to restate when it's expected that they'll have the 2005-2006 numbers up to date and to give us a full sense of what's being carried forward, the problem, and in the sense of who we can work forward to make this adjustment. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As we stated, it would take us a few months to do our work where we feel we could be in a position to provide Members more information on whether we think we'll have to make another adjustment for the 2006-2007 budget. As the normal process is, after year-end we'll have to go through the normal works of our budgeting exercise to come up with year-end numbers and after that we'll then be able to come back with the results of the 2005-2006 year. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In this particular case, obviously we have an agreement in place and we have to ensure that it's funded properly, which I have no concern with that issue. The concern I think I would have is, and this is what I'm asking for, is a commitment from the Minister whereas when we notice these anomalies and they may not be specific to, for example, Collective Agreement issues where dental premiums are under funded or whatnot. It could be a whole array of issues. But when we notice anomalies like this and, as stated by Mr. Voytilla, was noticed last summer when they were building the 2006-2007 budget, I'm wondering if the Minister could commit today to start sending us a letter to inform us that there should be large anomalies that we should be expecting in advance. One could perceive this anywhere from eight to nine months after it was noticed and we're only seeing a dollar figure before us now. It's not a difficult issue to pass on my side or my perspective; I have no problem with it. It's only the concern of notice from a Regular Member's point of view. It's the old, by the way, we weren't funding this properly, guess what, we have a $1.2 million bill that came out of nowhere, but all along it was being funded internally. I guess all I'm asking from the Minister is that we can consider a best practice that when we notice anomalies like this, he could give the Accountability and Oversight committee a bit of a heads up so we can foresee these things coming, and that way they're not a bit of a shock to either the system or whatnot, or surprise. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I think we already have in place a fairly good system of informing Members when we have to make changes in the budget process, as well as request more funding. As stated in this case, as we became aware of it and started looking at this, started to do some of the review in this area working with departments, we've come to the point where we know we will not have the room within FMBS for 2005-2006 fiscal year to absorb this type of spike in the budget itself. Yes, the Member is right; between areas where it is, for example in this case, part of the union agreements we have and other areas where it does not fall into those categories, we can try to mitigate some of those costs in other areas. If, again, it ultimately comes down to the department's ability to fund and if there's to be any changes from within departments, there's that reporting process and requirement through to Members, as well. So we can work with what we have in place, I believe, to work with Members to keep them informed of changes in budget areas as we become aware of them and do our substantiation as to why they're happening. Of course, we know when we do inform Members of changes, we get questions as to why these things are occurring, so we have to do our work, as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Page 7, Executive, operations expenditures, Financial Management Board Secretariat, client services, not previously authorized, $1.239 million.

Total Financial Management Board Secretariat, $1.239 million.

Total department, not previously authorized. $2.449 million.

Page 8, Finance, operations expenditures, directorate, not previously authorized, negative $4,000.

Bureau of Statistics, not previously authorized, negative $992,000.