In all honesty, I would not be able to tell you which measure is best. We have not had an opportunity to study it and obtain all the information. This is one more piece that is added to another piece, with no thought for the overall picture. It is difficult for us to look at the relevance of a piece like that without having an opportunity to look at the overall picture, always bearing in mind people's ability to pay.
We cannot comment on the relevance of this measure in particular because it is, essentially, one measure on top of another. In essence, this is about adding $4 billion. We must make a distinction between social measures taken in a difficult situation and an insurance program which must comply with conditions. If we do not like these conditions, let us change them. But it becomes extremely difficult when you pay your premiums and see that the criteria have suddenly changed.
Since we are going through a temporary situation, this must also be a temporary measure. We are all hoping that the recovery will occur as quickly as possible, but that will require private investment. We have heard about infrastructure, and that might help, but at some point, we need to take measures to stimulate private investment.
Going back to your question more specifically, we say that the money must come from general revenue. We are prepared to examine the program in general terms to see how we could improve it, given the new economy and the situation. But not during a period of crisis, because a crisis is a poor advisor.