They actually did do an analysis of that. They looked at it from the perspective that it is a family expenditure, in the sense that it's household oriented. Is it disproportionately impacting women or men? Well, they can't really tell, because it's a household expenditure and it's focused on children. Then they looked at whether there is a differential impact in terms of beneficiaries, i.e. the children. Boys tend to play hockey more than girls, and hockey has more expensive equipment than perhaps basketball. They did actually go to that degree. But again, it always depends on what kind of data you have, and if you don't have data what kind of assumptions you can legitimately make.
On February 14th, 2008. See this statement in context.