I'm not going to filibuster. I'll just take the minute.
Getting back to my key point, then, because you have raised Sweden as an example. The context of the report seems to be in the tradition of right-wing or laissez-faire economics. But there are many aggressive examples, which are established, where productivity increases through government investment, through public policy.
Why aren't those examples cited more in your report? You're aware of them obviously. You have studied them. To my mind, that is a crucial component of moving forward. We can't continue to go down the same track that we have for 20 years. It hasn't worked. So why aren't there more of those reference points in your report?