I recognize that, but in terms of providing advice to government—and you're in one of the most senior roles in providing that kind of advice to government—it does strike me, when you look at something like the sustainable development technology fund, for example. For that fund, which is taking in, I would say, risky but important bets, it makes a lot of sense that there would probably be some kind of equity that comes back in some instances, whereas it may not make sense for other programs. Maybe it makes sense; maybe it doesn't.
I don't think we have a culture in the government, frankly—or I don't think we have a history across governments—of looking at a return in the way that we've seen in the two examples I used. It's possible to invest in important things from a public interest perspective and also have a return to ensure that we see greater value for those dollars and that we extend those dollars.
Changing lanes, let's go to the conversation we had recently—