As for the AgriStability program, among others, we need to identify known mechanisms that can respond quickly. A little earlier, I said that the program was not suitable for extended periods of decline in income. I think we need to establish reinsurance mechanisms. It may be necessary to establish margin support adjustment mechanisms based on known standards. This would give rise to easily adaptable programs that are known to producers. Producers would have choices to make, if they opted for a reinsurance mechanism. It would already be predictable. People would have preset principles and would know the risks they wanted to insure. I think it would be a matter of simplifying the programs.
The AgriRecovery program does not work. In fact, there is a combination happening. If you consider the loss of income caused by mortality or poor production practices, it is covered in part by AgriRecovery. For the other part, you have to use AgriStability. I think it is essential for the AgriRecovery program to provide for all those things, for it to truly help a business recover in the event of a natural disaster. I think the principle of AgriRecovery is a good one, but the interventions need to be structured based on the risks that the business assumes, which are caused either by production losses or by the inability to engage in agriculture.