There are a couple of things. First, I think this goes to what Laura was discussing, in terms of regulation in and regulation out. Without an accurate measure, it's incredibly difficult to determine where and how we're trending, other than what we hear anecdotally from our members, or through surveys, such as what the CFIB does.
One way to actually get a true picture of that is understanding it. In a complex operating environment, you're seeing a burden reduced in one area, but at the other side you're trying to understand what new costs will be imposed through any number of different regulatory initiatives under way in multiple departments at different levels of government. It's a lot for companies, and they sometimes feel besieged.
It's hard, especially for smaller members, to weigh in on those regulatory exercises, to let the department know that although the new initiative may seem innocuous in and of itself, it's the ton-of-feathers problem. It's being layered on top of all of these other ones that exist. For us, the big piece around determining how good a government is doing would be setting a measure that makes them publicly accountable, so that departments and the government itself can understand what progress they're making.