I appreciate what Mr. Eyking's saying, and I appreciate what the opposition's doing. I'm very aware what some of the witnesses have said.
But let me highlight the fact again. There are a lot of changes going on to AMPA in this piece of legislation. There are some drastic changes on the payment and repayment in that process. That may change the statistics somewhere down the road. I think we should wait and see what those numbers do.
When they do change, if they should happen to change, I understand—and correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Lloyd—you have the flexibility to not only change the interest-free portion amount, but even the total amount. So not only the $100,000 interest free, but you have the ability to say now it reflects $500,000 or $600,000. It's not something that we need to put in this piece of legislation at this point in time. You already have the flexibility to do that.
Right now I would suggest that we wait and see what actually happens with the farm gate and how they use the new rules that come into AMPA, and then make a decision somewhere down the road on what's adequate for farmers. The information we have right now says this is more than adequate and is not justifying a reason to raise it.
I think you're just a little premature, Mr. Eyking, on saying we should raise it before we have data that suggests we should be raising it. We haven't seen that data at this point in time.