I’d appreciate if we can get that level of detail. Again, interest compounded daily, monthly, yearly adds up, especially when you’re dealing with potentially over $11 million, $12 million. Again, public accounts has shown us that that rolling average went down for a couple years and now it’s back up there. Again, I think it was around $7 million. I encourage the department to keep a handle on that because that’s a cost. It’s a cost we don’t talk about. It’s a cost that’s a burden to the taxpayer.

To the question, though, in terms of zero-based budgeting and looking at forecasting for the 2015-16 Main Estimates, I notice that for all reciprocal billings except for the specialist physicians in Nunavut have remained the same. It’s the same as the revised estimates of 2014. More importantly, they’re all zeros. They’re all averaged up to a whole number, which I find that odd if we’re doing a budget purpose that we wouldn’t have the actual revised estimates as a whole number like that. Can we get some explanation why we’re just seeing literally, really, a rounded up number when really we should be, especially for revised estimates, we should be seeing some decimal points, some dollars and cents there rather than a very wholesome number.