I will answer in English.
Let me start by saying that in the chapter we have not measured actual emission reductions. You've noticed that in 2008-09 it's zero. I think the UNFCCC had said it's too early for any country to measure actual reductions for 2008. Our approach from the beginning was to look at the architecture or the preparedness in place for eventual reductions. That's just as a first statement or context.
For the technology fund, the government has set a 30-megatonne reduction for 2010. We've said that's not realistic, for different reasons. One was that the purpose of the technology fund is to develop new technologies. We've said that to develop and deploy new technologies, as well as then to measure actual reductions and to verify those reductions, is going to take longer than the next 18 months. That's the first thing.
The second thing is, if you're referring to the testimony of the Pembina Institute, there's a difference, as we noted in the chapter, between booking a credit and booking an actual reduction. That is why Monsieur Arseneault said, in the earlier statement, part of the reason for the overstatement is that the Kyoto Protocol and the KPIA require the government to disclose its actual reductions and not its credits. We said there's a lack of clarity or certainty between where the credits are booked and when the actual reductions will occur and in what year.