I want to note that those numbers have not been verified. The research that you did shows that it went to an indigenous company, but if you look deeper, you will find that this is not true when you go into each individual contract and who was part of it. Was it a shell company? Even though your reporting shows that it's indigenous, it may not have been. In reality, that so-called 6% is probably more like 1%.
I just don't understand. When the first aboriginal procurement strategy came out, it was 10%. There was no governing of it and nothing was done to enforce it, as was mentioned. In 2019, according to what I just heard, they started trying to enforce it, but as we know, the devil is in the details, and they weren't looking into the details to verify how much that indigenous company or person or entrepreneur actually received, because the majority of them—I hate to say this—are shell companies. It's important to go deeper to see that percentage.
To me, it would probably be more down in the 1% range. I'm not understanding how the government is now wanting to give 5% but couldn't even manage the 10%, so what's going to be different now?