The point I wanted to make was that the marketplace we're serving--and I think Dr. Van Acker talked about this as well--has changed remarkably and will continue to change. We can't imagine where we'll be in 10 years. I think the mix between investments and innovation, and investments and stabilization has to be a key part of the discussion that we have in Growing Forward 2.
I won't make a judgment about what the mix should be. There are a lot of people who would say that perhaps we're spending a little more than we should on stabilization and we're under-investing in innovation. I think that's the key message I would leave. It's going to be a key part of the discussion in Growing Forward 2, when it comes down to how much money is available for programming that will fund research programs and innovation and science. With a limited amount of dollars, it's either going to come from money in stabilization, or this committee will have to be very effective in getting the government to increase the amount of money going into agriculture. Perhaps we need both.
My last comment is that agriculture is a solution provider in health care and environmental sustainability. We can be a lot of things. We probably need an integrated strategy, where we're looking at health and agriculture and the environment and agriculture and are making a bigger investment. But if we're going to have to make choices, we do have to look at what we're stabilizing to when in fact the market changes every day.