Quickly, the expectation was that for the billion dollars, we would yield $5 billion. In the first two fiscal years, the lift was $2.6 billion, so we saw clearly that the value was going to be achieved.
Our concern was that when we were tagging individual files, we were worried that.... If we had six multinationals to audit, we would pick two that looked the most likely and give them to the revenue generation group and give four to the not-incremental funding group. Then you have this distorted behaviour with people trying to meet a revenue generation target, but the base goes down.
We could have found ourselves in a situation in which, on the billion for $5 billion, we would have exceeded, but our base funding that delivers year in and year out would have gone down. Then we would be in the awkward position of trying to explain to you how it is that we got extra money for rev-gen and we're saying we're exceeding on that, but our base program year over year is going down.
What we worked out with Finance and Treasury Board is that if we get 5% extra dollars, then 5% of our incremental results can be attributed to that. That's what we worked out with Finance and Treasury Board. We tried to actually make it simple and be more transparent to this committee and other stakeholders.