I want to follow up on the question by the parliamentary secretary, which, if I heard correctly, was that if there is a statement that says we're not going to eliminate the regulatory oversight, it would be sufficient for you.
I am just wondering about the quickness with which you answered that question. I'm not sure what the parliamentary secretary had in mind, but he probably had in mind that this statement would bind the government to the fiscal allocations required to ensure that the regulatory oversight be appropriately financed in order to be effective. Is that what you understood as well?