The distinction between voluntary and mandatory sometimes is overdrawn. We've seen in the past, for example, in the late 1990s, a lot of Canadians didn't believe CPP was on a sound footing. As a result, you could see one reason the savings rate was high in the 1990s was people didn't think CPP would be there. When CPP was put on a sound footing with the reforms in 1997 or 1998—I forget—you could see almost immediately voluntary savings came down. People had confidence, all of a sudden that those mandatory savings would be there for their pension. Sometimes the distinction between the two is overdrawn. It's not necessarily that...sometimes one is done in anticipation of what the other is going to do.
In the case of CPP, I've written extensively that I've been against the idea of mandatory contributions because I'm not convinced—certainly it is not a problem now—there's going to be a problem in 20 or 30 years. If people on their own want to take out an insurance policy against what's going to happen in 20 or 30 years, God bless them. Am I so confident there's going to be a problem in 20 or 30 years from now that I want to impose and make that mandatory today? No.