Thank you, Madam Chair. So this was calculated in coordination with departments. And the way it was calculated was we determined if there was a legal liability that arose during the lifespan of the asset that would require expenses, then that would be added to the expense that was recorded at that time for the acquisition of the capital asset.

So just as an example that we used in the letter to committee was an asbestos. So if at a certain point, an existing building like the Laing Building or whatever was -- it was determined that (a) there was asbestos in it and then (b) a regulation had been implemented not allowing asbestos to be used and for it to be cleaned up in a certain manner, well, we know how much it costs to clean up asbestos so the cost of that liability, as it would have been in -- at the time that the liability was incurred, would be recorded retroactively and then brought forward to today's date. So that's how we -- and we -- we did an example like that in the letter to standing committee. So that's how it was calculated.

In as far as other environmental liabilities, like a contaminated site or something like that, we do have accounting standards for that but that's not dealing with this. This is the retirement of assets and how they're calculated so we're changing how the retirement of asset retirement obligations are calculated basically.

So overall that's about a $70 million retroactive expense for the government, and then as the Minister mentioned, $8 million expense going forward.

So that's not exactly money we will be spending, but it will be recorded as an expense. So in a way, it will limit what the government can spend but it -- it's not money we have to find, so to speak. So hopefully that explains that. Thank you.