I think that can be achieved through audits of the actual contracts.
When you look at the contracts, if it's a joint venture and you go through all the subcontracts and you see where the payments are going, look at how much of the money is actually staying with the indigenous community. That should be the amount that's reported.
Some of these big contracts could be up to $100 million, and they're JVs, joint ventures. That full $100 million is getting credit as indigenous spend, but in reality there's no way it's $100 million.
In a best-case scenario, if the indigenous partner has the 51%, they would be potentially getting $51 million of the value of that contract. That should be reported for these companies that are getting an advantage from this when they say that a $100-million contract will go to the 5%, when in reality only maybe 5% of that $100 million is going to the indigenous business. Only that 5% of the $100 million should be reported as indigenous spend, and that would bring the numbers down to be more realistic. It would show the true benefit of what is spent that's going to the indigenous communities, businesses or people.
I think there have to be post-award contract audits.