I'll do that first. It's a semantics issue.
I've gotten irritated over the years by governments talking about targets. In fact, politicians do that often. They get up and talk about a target, but there is no means of achieving it. I notice that in certain policies where people really mean business—let's say the U.S. Clean Air Act of 1990—they don't talk about it as a target; they talk about it as an obligation, a cap, a requirement.
If someone says that this is our target, a target to me implies some notion that you might not achieve it. I guess that's my idea. What we're saying is that if we listen to the scientists, we really need to have some firm requirements that we're going to achieve.
The question was when we would see change if the policies were implemented immediately. You'd see change immediately.