Thank you.
Along the same lines, we have put forward--we didn't originate the idea, we just developed the policy--the whole notion of further investment into retrofitting our existing buildings, in particular residences, because commercial-industrial can be on a different track in terms of how you look at it economically. But certainly refurbishing homes does a number of things, and there are three obvious ones.
First of all, it helps our country meet our international obligations, whether it's Kyoto or something going forward, so that as a country we're lowering our emissions.
Secondly, it creates jobs, possibly hundreds of thousands of jobs, because people have to physically go in there and do the work. And this is locally created work.
Lastly, it lowers people's energy costs. So it's actually a savings for Canadians, because over the years they'll be putting out less money for energy costs.
My question, again, is--and I'll leave it very open for you--am I blowing it up too much to suggest that this implies, like the infrastructure, that there's a cost to our nation on the macro level if we don't do this, as well as conversely, that it's a positive that provides good stimulation and helps us hit a number of national objectives?
I'd like your thoughts, please.