This is a good question. It's in relation to whether we can give you baseline data. We have no baseline data by which we can tell you that 76% is more or less than the baseline data. I will say that 76% strikes me as incredibly high. If we find the baseline data to be any higher than 76%, then I will have a very different opinion on how significant this issue is. If this is an outlier and the baseline turns out to be much lower, I think it's indicative of something somewhat unique to ArriveCAN. Without doing the review, it's a bit difficult for me to comment.
That being said, is it within the rules? As mentioned in a previous question, it's the frequency with which this is happening that causes the concern. If it were just happening on a one-off basis—there's a significant time lag, the contract is awarded, months or even a year goes by and those resources are no longer available—then yes, there is a mechanism by which they can and should be replaced in those circumstances. However, where it looks and starts to feel like a business practice of identifying the best resources in the hope that this allows a specific vendor to obtain the contract, and they have no intention of providing those resources in the performance of the work, then I think it is problematic.