Of course. Let me answer the first question.
You talk about the Congo. I have already alluded to Burkina Faso, which is a very different country, but which also has certain problems to which money is not always a solution; rather, it can be a problem. That's why I've insisted so strongly that revenues and taxes can be better negotiated.
Indeed, if there are trends towards higher prices for minerals, then of course I think the division should be better and the host country should benefit. In order for that money to arrive at the right place, you need proper institutional capacity-building. That's what I've emphasized very strongly.
Of course, there is this issue of the Dutch disease. This is one of the things that was also very strongly addressed in the Haglund report that I mentioned at the beginning of my presentation. It is very difficult for countries such as Burkina Faso, with a sector that is currently booming very fast and substantially, to not have these effects on other parts of the economy.
I think Professor Bebbington, in his statement on February 29, rightly emphasized that you should not take development to be just a project, but look at the larger picture and the larger institutional activities. In that sense, I think some of the initiatives now being carried out by Canadian NGOs to set up training to see if there can be spinoffs of the mining revenues into other parts of the economy are crucial.
In that sense—in economic terms as well—there is a lot of work to be done to make this into revenues that contribute to the public good and to other parts of the economy, to make it into a poverty reduction exercise rather than just increasing inequalities.