Can I very briefly speak to that?
In principle we could bring forward capital plans for departments that would in essence do, I believe, what you're saying. The real point I wanted to make, though, was that of course the fiscal planners in government, through the budget, are very careful to not allow a department to be in a position, unless Parliament should choose so, for the $25 million to be incurred without the $75 million being there.
We of course only give multi-year approvals for such major purchases, and there is a question of bringing that level of approval to a department's ongoing capital plans within its own as we move to accrual. If we have the accrual information, we should be able to potentially look at bringing that forward, but we are not, in a major situation, likely to end up where you are in that problem because the budget took care of it.
However, if Parliament disagreed, then it would be in that position that we'd get stuck. In that situation we could be stuck with the $25 million spent, and a useless hole in the ground or whatever.