Could I just add this? I think all the people here have been saying that, with stats, they don't drill down to get that. And there's also another layer. We have to be really clear about women of colour, aboriginal women, women with disabilities. There's a further drilling down to be done on that.
But it's a little bit like when they talk about what the unemployment rate is. If you're employed for eight hours or four hours or whatever, you're considered employed, not that you could live on it. You look at the stats about what the unemployment rate is, but we really know that the unemployment rate is a lot higher. So it's the same thing that happens with gender: there's not a drilling down and it doesn't get to what some of the other things are, as I say—for example, if you've got child care.
It makes a difference, by the way, whether women have pay equity, because if we don't have pay equity—guess what—our benefits are going to be lower even in higher-paid jobs.