Thank you very much for that very important question.
I will give a partial answer and I will turn again to Mr. Piché for the interplay between CERB and the wage subsidy.
What I should mention is that you will remember that very early on the definition for CERB eligibility really emulated that set for people who were eligible for employment insurance, which you know very well doesn't necessarily address very well the reality of people who are self-employed or, as you mentioned in particular, in the gig economy.
We were very seized with that very early on and spent a fair amount of time explaining internally to our colleagues that it was very important that we either extended CERB or provided complementary measures.
I'm proud to say that we were successful on both fronts. We wanted to be very clear that all of the $500 million should not overlap or duplicate the wage subsidy or the CERB, but should be complementary, with elements that would go to organizations to help maintain the employment of people as much as possible.
So we have two big pillars: the CERB and the wage subsidy. On top of that we designed the distribution of the $500 million for organizations so they would have a little bit more and something more specific to their reality, particularly because they are, by and large, non-profit organizations that are supporting artists who are self-employed.
The way we did that was by requiring every applicant to attest to the fact that the funding would not duplicate either the wage subsidy or, in the case of individuals, the CERB.
Jean-Stéphen, do you want to add something?
He spent a lot of time on that, and I would like to congratulate him because he was the mastermind behind that idea.
Monsieur Piché.