Okay.
I noticed that you were both here for the first panel. I'll just reread the very brief end of a quote, because it talked about social impact bonds and one of the reasons they're so positive: “It takes risk off the shoulder of government: if no positive benefit is generated, the government is not on the hook to pay any money.”
That speaks to two things that I think are very crucial here. One is that there is value for taxpayers' money, which is important. The other part of it, though, is the idea that we're ensuring outcomes. That is even more important. When we're talking about ensuring outcomes, we're actually talking about helping people. We're talking about changing lives. That's what “outcomes” means. It's not just a word. It means that people's lives are actually being changed, that we're providing some significant help for people.
If that's the case, is this idea of a social impact bond not worth at least trying, to make sure that we can get the best results possible for at-risk Canadians?