Based on our experience, I can tell you that, even when you provide the information, sometimes it's out of your hands. You can say it, but then the onus of the decision is not on us. Ultimately, the information can be found. You can provide extensive due diligence to certain companies or pension funds, but, again, you can't do anything.
From our perspective, I think the U.S. system is a clear example of how things could be done, that is, working with the regulator to potentially lead to prosecution to a certain degree. Again, you go from one end to the other end of the spectrum. There should be, of course, an in-between, but it should start with extensive due diligence. What can be done and what should be delivered to people holding certain shares in a certain fund? They should be able to know. That is one thing. Now, knowing is not everything. What do you do when you have this information?
Canadian authorities should also potentially have a list similar to the U.S. one regarding companies that should not be held or companies that you should not invest in. I think that could also be a possibility.