I did ask a question as to whether additional resources had been committed for the budgeting exercise, and I gathered that there had not been. I take my hat off to them for trying to do something, but I would want to see much, much more, and much more in depth.
For instance, with the $5,000 tax credit for lower incomes, from the way it's presented I found it very difficult to see what indicators they would use to say this is going to benefit women. Yes, women have lower incomes than men, but do they have the funds to put into savings? Where do we get that information?
Our statement was that starting gender-based analysis is going to throw out more questions than answers. This is one question that maybe we have to follow in the next round to see what it has really meant. We made an assumption that it would benefit women. Has it really? Have we seen the savings in women's names being used? That's something you can keep your finger on.