Yes, I see the $1.7 million that we've identified and the deputy indicated that would be required for the current water source chosen. Clearly we can't know what the costs will be in going forward in future years if it's deemed that there's a more appropriate water source, but I think the Member is certainly interested in having a chance to see those lab reports prior to the adjournment of session, so we can have some discussion about whether another water source is preferable and get some sort of discussion around how much money we would be talking about in future years. After this session and after we pass this budget, the next year's budget process will certainly be shortened, given that it's an election year. I think the Member is going to want a chance to get some commitments from this Minister that, if we are talking about a different water source, he has the chance to get that kind of thing into the capital plan and onto the department's radar before two budget sessions from now. Clearly this is something that has needed work for some time and I don't think it's adequate to suggest that this will have to be delayed another couple of years if there are substantial changes of this nature made. Thank you.