No, no, but it would just be of interest.
I've worked at the coal face with aboriginal communities in health care, etc., so I'm going to use an example, in terms of market forces, and perhaps you could share with me why you think this is wrong.
The nursing profession is typically female-dominated. We have nurses in our federal government system. Perhaps we're doing a classification process. Let's say they decide they will go through the whole process, and physiotherapists, who, let's say, are 50-50 male to female, end up in the same category—this is a little bit hypothetical—so here you have physiotherapists and nurses in the same category. But the nurses are in short supply. Nurses are being drained off to the United States or are being drained off throughout the world, and physiotherapists are not in such short supply. In this case, you look at women and a predominantly female profession. Are they not going to be unduly harmed by not taking into account market forces?
Market forces make some sense to me, and again I'll use that example of nurses. In this case, nurses who would actually be putting market forces into the formula would perhaps benefit from it. I open that up for some comments.