I want to echo what Mr. Kobly said, and I've been arguing this in my research in different areas including social policy and for that matter account policy. I really think that you have to target. It's the same idea as in business; we talk about focus. I think there's no good argument for universality, whether we're talking CPP reform, where most people do not need help but some people do. That's an example of targeting.
To answer your question on infrastructure, I think you will go ahead with infrastructure and I think it's a great idea, but I think you have to do it in a very smart way and target. I'm drawing on Jack Mintz's excellent paper, which I hope all of you read, published only a couple of months ago. Infrastructure is projects that speed up the movement of goods, services, or people across distances.
Let me be really blunt. That rules out green infrastructure. It rules out social housing, and it's not because I'm against social housing. I'm not. We do it in Ottawa. But if you're asking me what will give you the better bang for the buck, it's focusing on infrastructure that moves stuff: roads, ports, railroads, pipelines, that sort of thing. If you want the economy to get moving again you're going to get a much bigger ROI on so-called traditional infrastructure.
To answer your question, because I think you were asking about infrastructure, I would deal with that.