That's a great question.
Equity participation is something we're seeing in some deals. I recently published a paper on the five different financial models associated with these kinds of agreements—impact and benefit agreements—and equity participation is one of them.
It depends. Equity participation comes with risks, and sometimes an aboriginal government cannot enter into those risks. If you need a secure stream of funding to support urgent needs, such as dealing with housing or youth suicide, for example, which is a key issue, you need secure funding that's there dependably each year. Equity participation cannot guarantee that, because of the risks. So it depends on what the government needs. I think mature governments are looking at agreements, assessing what their funding stream is, the dependability of their funding stream, and then turning to the agreement possibilities and selecting the adequate one. But certainly we are seeing equity participation as an option these days.