Thank you.
I want to go back to the comments of Ms. Petitpas Taylor to clarify something.
I understood you to say that these policies were not focused on hot housing markets, but in fact I heard that your comments were exactly in sync with what we just heard from the previous testimony, that the object of these changes was related to debt load. We can see in the reports and in the testimony, in fact, that it's not just Vancouver and Toronto. We heard testimony—and I believe you were here for that, too—that Montreal was on that list, not because of high property prices but in fact because of consumer debt load.
Can you clarify for me whether your comments were in sync with what we just heard in the earlier testimony, that the object of these changes was not related to hot markets?