Yes, we can get that information fairly easily.
In some other areas, I want to try to get specifics on the record if I can. It's been said in many different ways, but I assume almost everyone here is speaking of the allowance under APF, which isn't currently allowed, of companion programs, MRP specifically in Ontario. There's basically general agreement on that, I gather.
I guess there were some differences. You raised a point. You're the only one who's ever raised it in all the hearings, Ian, the fact that you were somewhat dissatisfied with the savings account program. Maybe somebody from the government could tell us, because we're still waiting for a lot of details on the $1 billion that's been announced ten times, but it isn't to be the same as NISA, I don't believe, entirely. It is a savings account program, but you're the only one I've heard who has problems with it, so could you outline those for us? Think about that for a minute.
I do have to come back to the point Mr. Miller made in the earlier session--some of you were here--where he pointed out there's no connection about what's happening with the Canadian Wheat Board and supply management. There is a huge connection, because the implication of when you move to individual choice from collective choice is that in any industry--and a precedent has now been set in this country--if somebody wants to market outside that system, if they have a threshold of 13.8% support, then that industry can in fact be undermined.
That's the precedent, Larry, of the decision that was made in western Canada. It comes down to individual choice versus collective choice.
I'd like to come back to you, Ian. The other last point is on international trade negotiations. Should environment and labour be included in those negotiations, rather than the current stand?