It's a tough question, but it's a question our organization is aware of. We're hearing that our governments, all governments, would like to balance their budgets. Let's face it, if we had our choice, we'd like to keep a good insurance program—something farmers could participate in, understand what they're covered for, and afford to pay the premiums on. We still have to keep some kind of core business risk.
AgriInvest is very important. We need to keep and enhance that program, because it's very predictable. You can have a disaster on your farm. For example, if a grain farmer needs a combine motor, it's about $30,000. You'd have to come up with that money, and a lot of farmers don't have it in the middle of the harvest. You can't rely on AgriStability to help you there.
I think we're tending to go away from AgriStability because of the way the program is designed. If it's maintained, we don't think it's going to be a good program. So we're saying that we should look at some modifications. Maybe it'll end up keeping the government's costs lower.
Innovation and research are very important. Canada has to keep its doors open to any company that wants to set up here. I think we have fairly user friendly regulations that make it attractive for companies to come here and invest. I think they've proven that, and so we'd like to maintain that. We need to keep a good relationship with the universities. The University of Saskatchewan has had great success in plant breeding. We want to keep those doors open and make sure that companies can come and invest. We think the two go hand in hand.