Thank you for your question, sir.
When we ask whether this is an error or a decision, I think the Auditor General has been very clear on that point. I do support her views that 2002-03 seemed to be just honest errors in terms of accounting, in which period it should be recorded.
As the commissioner has also pointed out, all the costs have been reported as of the end of 2005, so it's just a question of the timing. It's a very important question, and I do not minimize that at all, but was there a decision to record the $21.8 million? Not in 2003-04. Later, yes indeed, a decision was made to do so.
At the time, the official who looked at the issues had multiple advice, so it's not just only one; we're providing multiple advice for different perspectives. Some were taking the perspective that this transaction should be recorded as per the generally accepted accounting principles when you do accounting on an accrual basis. Some--