Charlie, thanks for the question.
I will talk a little about some of the other BRM recovery programs that we've highlighted for the two sectors you've mentioned.
Coming back to our recommendations and some of the losses that we've seen in the feeding industry due to all of this, the recommendation around payment caps and the need for them to better reflect the size of the industry is quite important, with $3 million being a number that was used and set in place many iterations of the program ago. I think that increasing that cap needs to be looked at going forward, especially for larger feeders in the range of 20,000 to 25,000 head and above, and then, as you say, filtering down to the cow-calf sector and AgriStability.
This is really where the reference margin limit plays a huge role in putting those producers at a disadvantage under the program. They need a devastating drop in revenue before that program is really going to provide benefit for them, just because of their cost structure. I know MNP talked about that a little bit earlier in their presentation.
As we look forward, along with the 85% reference margin trigger, I think these are all things that need to be looked at very seriously within the AgriStability program.