Yes and moreover, the deferral mechanism for unused contributions has been eliminated, which means that if parents really want to save for their children's education, they must do so for a period of 18 to 20 years. One cannot accumulate $100,000 in unused contributions and use them all up in one year. That's my answer.
I have another comment. I mentioned wealthy individuals who stand to benefit from the bill as it is now worded. Let me use our own situations as an example. In light of our income, we surely are among the more fortunate members of our society. We have good working conditions and our employer contributes to a good pension fund. Most of us cannot contribute at all, or can only make very modest contributions, to an RRSP. Since I'm going to be a father in September, it would be wonderful if this bill passes. It would mean that I could contribute an additional $18,000. That money would in fact be tax exempt, not merely sheltered from tax, because my son or daughter will pay virtually no tax when the time comes to pursue an education. This measure would be very beneficial to me and to all of us seated here at this table. However, we need to be realistic. The middle class finds itself in an entirely different situation. There's no need for us to increase the limit this dramatically in order to make it interesting for people.