Yes, I would. You can read it in the Auditor General's report. There are many elements mentioning that.
I think, at the beginning, the objective was to go fast and go to the people who were most in need. If you look at the numbers, it's amazing how it went exactly where it had to go. I'll give you a few examples.
For poverty, without the benefit and with the benefit it's a gap of 5% that is assessed on what it would have been. If you look at individual groups who received the benefit, the groups that we know are marginalized are the ones that got a higher percentage of the benefit. Their population is overrepresented. It's not overrepresented because they should not have received it. It's just because we knew that they were in need. If you look at women, if you look at indigenous people.... If you track where the money went from a geographical perspective and where the high spots of the pandemic were, you can see also that it goes with it.
There's no doubt in my mind that the benefits were efficient for this, because they actually went where we wanted them to go. That's easy to do sometimes. Also, the way the economy came back after the pandemic demonstrated that the benefits were beneficial for society.