Not that I am aware of—except, as I said, if organizations like the Canada Council are also asked to take from Peter to feed Paul. If we're talking about redirections within the envelopes, that's indeed the approach that seems to have been taken in this case, for whatever reasons. We're here to say “I don't think so, that's not the right idea”, but in the spirit—which we applaud—taken by the government in renewing and securing the current level of funding for five years, because I really don't think there have been major increases in the budget of the Canada Music Fund. There may have been some fringe increases, but essentially we're talking about a redirection of money that existed. The fact it is subject to votes of Parliament on a yearly basis and there's a commitment for five years is certainly something that is most welcome, and this has been expressed publicly. Mr. Moore quoted a number of our members who were lauding this. He doesn't have a quote from me, but he could, because from the above perspective, that's not the problem.
The problem is exactly what's been described in front of you during all of these sessions, in that you're taking away from something that is really important but doesn't seem so. It may have seemed at the first level, at first blush, there were duplications with the existing programs, but I think there's enough evidence here in front of you to show that is not the case. I hope the government will recognize that.