Update: The figures have now been published. The £1.4 billion transition cost of the programme given by the Prime Minister on Monday is listed on page four of of Impact Assessment.

This is accompanied by additional details in the Co-ordinating Document, showing the method behind how the redundancy costs are calculated. Page 12 in the Co-ordinating Document also explains where the figure for the £1.7 billion within two years comes from.

As always, if there is anything you spot in the documents that you think should be brought to our attention get in contact.

With the debate over the Government's NHS reforms reaching fever pitch David Cameron this morning went into bat for the proposals.

Defending against accusations that the creation of GP consortia to handle NHS commissioning would burden a cash-strapped NHS with unneeded cost, the Prime Minister insisted that savings would see the reform pay for itself within two years.

“We are spending £1.4 billion which will save £1.7 billion within two years ... We will actually be making net savings within two years in terms of this change” he told the Today Programme.

Curious about his figures Full Fact called the Department of Health to see these numbers for ourselves.

Sadly when we heard back we were told the breakdown of these costs will not be published until later in the week.

Full Fact has previously raised concerns about the ability of ministers to quote from research that only they are privy to.

Regardless of the ultimate veracity of the claim, that the estimate cannot be scrutinised by either members of the press or public leaves the Prime Minister making an unaccountable claim.

Until the figures come out on Wednesday, there is no way of knowing how the two numbers are arrived at, and thus if they were being used legitimately.

This is particularly important on this specific issue as last year an academic at Manchester Business School published an article suggesting the cost of the reform could reach £3 billion - much higher than the £1.4 billion cited by the PM.

Though the Department have said they do not recognise this higher figure, until their own estimates are published we cannot gauge why the assessments diverge so much.

This is not to say Mr Cameron has broken any rules by using the numbers, but Full Fact has previously highlighted the case of Immigration Minister Damian Green quoting unpublished Home Office research.

When the research was published it turned out there were major caveats glossed over by the Minister, however by then his figures had already received widespread coverage in the media..

We will return to Mr Cameron's numbers when they are available on Wednesday. But even if they vindicate the Prime Minister, the ability of a politician to quote figures two days before they are publicly available raises serious questions.