What I'm saying is that surely one of the policy considerations would have been whether there was some way we could make sure part of this would stay with people who actually need it. The Caledon Institute, as you may have seen, has put out a report indicating that a dual-income-earning family making $30,000 a year kept something around $200 of that, whereas a $200,000, single-income family kept, I think, $1,000 of it. Was there no consideration given to using you guys to say there were different options for delivering this in a better way?
