I'll answer the last two, and perhaps Susan will answer the first one on retroactivity.
Coming back to your question about the period over which we calculated the contribution rate, technically we need 60 years to calculate the steady contribution rate you need to make sure the plan stays on a sound financial footing. However, the chief actuary's report covers a 75-year period in its projections. Of course, you can see that even though 60 years was technically the period used to determine the rate that would ensure sustainability, the numbers—which cover 75 years in the actuary's report—are clearly showing that between years 61 and 75, things continue to be more or less along the same lines as they were previously. So it's perhaps the slight distinction between the 60 and the 75. But fundamentally, the viable steady state rate is calculated over a long period of time.
If I may add, the rate we need to make sure the plan is sustainable is not calculated on the basis of running down the fund, with the fund being zero at the end of the 60-year period. That's not the case. It's essentially maintaining the level of funding during the entire period. So by the end of that 60 or 75 years, the fund has stayed constant in relative terms. The current projection shows that the fund is basically covering five years of benefits throughout the entire period, including to 2075, and so on. That's the answer to the second question.
Your third one was....