I'm not sure if I'm specifically answering your question, but with the business risk management program—as mentioned in the presentation—I think with the changes to AgriStability farmers basically backed away. They didn't see value in the program. On AgriInsurance, where your crop insurance programs are in place, those have worked I think very well. They cover that risk. I think by looking at reinvesting in AgriStability, that helps address some of the income declines that take place from time to time in the industry.
One of the other things I think that is always a bit of a difficult thing when we're designing programming is making sure that it isn't countervailable from a trade perspective. That's always been an issue. I think we've managed to design programs that have not been challenged. I think it's something that still has to be kept in mind because we are a trading nation.
The answer to your question, are these programs being effective, and what needs to be done to design...? I wouldn't tinker with something that's working like the insurance programs. For the AgriInvest, I think having an increase in the government contribution to that would give farmers more to make some strategic investments, but as well I think we should be looking at the AgriStability and getting it redesigned to work better.