I'm very glad you raised the spoilage issue because that is a very practical concern. Overall, when you have shipments of perishable nutritious food, obviously it doesn't matter what kind of subsidy you offer to the retailers. If they don't sell it, if it's not a product that community wants or the consumers who shop there want, they're going to be unprofitable. While spoilage seems to me to be a legitimate concern—and it should be properly tracked because we are talking about perishable foods—I would also point out that ultimately there's a market base here. The foods that are being made available by the retailer.... I think there's no other way to measure that.
Moving on, I'd like to go to some of Mr. Bevington's comments again, Mr. Chair, because I want to get a better understanding of this.
When I budget for a kitchen reno, I put a number on how much I'm going to spend. Often you don't know some of the other costs. Obviously, my kitchen is very limited; my wife tells me that all the time. But government programs.... Sometimes you have unanticipated things, such as what retailers bring in because of what consumers want. As Ms. Swords said earlier, sometimes some communities have different tastes than others.
Is it possible to budget, let's say, $60 million and then have that exceeded? That's, I think, the rationale for the increase Parliamentary Secretary Strahl announced last November. Is that the case?