Well, maybe to add to that, I would say that in other innovation economies that are doing really well, when the operators have skin in the game, it makes a big difference. For example, if you're running a venture capital firm—to Mark's point—and you raised $100 million of private capital and the government said, “If other investors have trusted you with $100 million of capital—and your own money, too, by the way—we should double that, right?”.... Those types of programs mean you get professional investors making venture decisions.
The second proposal we have that we think would unleash a huge amount of investment opportunity.... Bear in mind that the challenge with early-stage venture is that many things don't work out. What you're trying to do is create the conditions to develop outliers. You know, we talk about Shopify here in Ottawa as an example. That one outlier generates probably hundreds of millions of dollars of income tax revenue each year for Canada because it's an outlier, but many small businesses don't succeed. If we said, for example, that you have up to x dollars per year that any Canadian could invest either directly or through a fund and, as Mark said, in a flow-through manner where you could write it off immediately and then pay a capital gain if it works in the future, you could unleash a huge amount of private capital into the earliest, highest-risk phase of the cycle.
There is a reason we haven't done what the U.S. does; it is because you need a virtuous cycle of wins to get people to take more risk. If you have a huge win and make a lot of money, you're more willing to take part of those gains and invest that at the earliest risk stage of the business.
Those are the things that we would talk about: unleashing the Canadians and levering up more venture capitalists. I would bet that if you look at the return rates of a firm like ours versus those of BDC, you will see that they're considerably higher.