Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, the GNWT hasn't borne the entire costs. So part of the costs here are actually being paid by this project entity, which includes Ledcor. They are the ones that were responsible for financing -- building and financing the line. So the costs that they've incurred are quite significant. The GNWT actually is not fully responsible for all of those because of the P3 arrangements, they undertook some of the risk, including some of the risk of cost overruns. Now -- so it's not so simple as to say that all of those cost overruns are entirely the GNWT's responsibility. That's -- that is the benefit of having the P3, is that another entity takes on risk and when matters go up in cost, they are sometimes responsible for it. And that is one of these situations.

I'm hesitating, Madam Chair, only because some of that was the subject of the matter that was settled, and I want to not run afoul of an agreement about what was settled and why it was settled upon. They were claiming obviously an increase of costs that they put under the supervening events, a discussion was had as to what amount we would agree were under the project agreement and therefore the GNWT would compensate for. But some of what they were claiming for as being cost overruns was not going to be compensated for under this process. So again, Madam Chair -- and I don't have all the details, neither do any of us have all the details going back to 2013 of what budgets were and what cost overruns were over that course of time. So perhaps I could, again, suggest that we'll begin by getting committee members a more detailed breakdown of the budgets and costs. And then hopefully that will help provide a bit more clarity and ensure that we are remaining on side with the settlement agreement that led to this very specific line item here. Thank you, Madam Chair.