I have a question for both Glen and Marc.
You indicated pretty stridently throughout your document and in your presentation today that tax reductions are not the way to go and you don't see that as sustainable in the long term. Having said that, one of the things that certainly have benefited the manufacturing sector has been the accelerated capital cost allowance. All parties, except perhaps the NDP, believe the extension of that accelerated capital cost allowance is a good thing, meaning that what we did is a very positive thing for the economy.
I know you've spoken about this, Mr. Hodgson, that one of the things we need to do with respect to China is the whole issue of competitiveness. If we're going to be competitive, at least when the dollar is closer to par, we'll have to find the machinery and equipment that will make us more competitive, that will make a greener environment in terms of the potential output of that machinery. So I see that as a tax cut, if you will, but one that has been very specific, very targeted.
You suggest in your document as well that we need to be more targeted. I would suggest to you that that is one of the most targeted tax cuts we could have done, supported across the country, $1.3 billion in investment.
So I'd have to think, Marc, you'd have to suggest at least on that one issue that reduction in itself has been very good for the country.