I have just a couple of points.
On the first question, in terms of the surplus in the account, I think it's important to remember what's happening with the overall actuarial position of the account. What I would say is that at the end of the actuarial period where we are expecting the account will balance, and I can't recall if that's 2016 or 2017, but I think there is certainly opportunity at that point to use some of the room in the EI rate to look at how we make investments in skills. I think that's a very appropriate thing to be doing.
One thing I would stress, though, is that my concern is about the investment in skills for everyone, not just simply for the unemployed. It's very important that however we look at which mechanism we want to use, whether it's EI or not—and I certainly would prefer to begin to break down some of the barriers among the funds that we have available for people who are qualified and not qualified for EI—I think the question is simply how we invest in skills. Do we make that available through a learning account? Do we make that available through funds that are set aside for an individual worker? Do we look at incentives to make the employer invest?
I think, personally, the evidence would suggest it's probably better that the money follow the person.