Provincial disparities are part of the insurance programs we have now.
As I travel through the three western provinces, I am very closely in touch with Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. The crop insurance program that I have on my grains and oilseeds farm in Alberta is a Cadillac. The producers in Saskatchewan look at it and see that they're not there, and the producers in Manitoba aren't there either.
From a crop insurance perspective, I believe that it's just different things. As Travis stated, the price insurance programs we have for the cattle, and now for the pork industry, are something that our Alberta producers have that are not there in other provinces. I believe it's important to have these programs on a nationwide basis. The program in Alberta, as I understand it, is totally self-funding. It could be made into a lot more attractive program with a little bit of help from government subsidies as far as premiums go.
I think that's an important part of where we have to go, because as we develop these programs, you want producers to make decisions on what risks they see and how to manage them. But we have to always remember that the bottom, AgriStability, has to be there, because there will cracks that they will fall through. There has to be something for them to land on.
We can't totally destroy the AgriStability program because, as we know, the additional programs are all funded by AgriStability in the end anyway. If I draw from any of the other programs, such as crop insurance, it comes off my AgriStability. It's all out of one fund. But this is encouraging producers to be involved in some of that risk management. Will the pool of money change? As I see it, probably not a whole bunch.
As far as natural disasters--