I would just say that we have to remember that there are costs involved here. When we undertake policies with a good intention, there are collateral effects. That's the reason the government, with the carbon tax, for example, introduced the rebate. We don't believe the rebate always compensates people to the point that the government claims, but they recognize that there is a cost. That's why they introduced the rebate.
I think that applies to other policies. This is a policy that costs money. This is $300 million that could go to any number of other things, including things that might be seeking the same objective but do a better job of it. I think we have to be mindful and not waste money. Especially with measures like this, if you're going to target the money, target it where it's most needed. I would suggest that the people who can afford a $55,000 vehicle are not the most needy.