Thank you. I don't want to get into debate. It's questionable; you're right, we're right and people in the community are right. It's something that has to be coordinated, and this government has, over the years, signed contracts -- three, four or five-year contracts -- especially municipal contracts. So that argument of committing future funds doesn't hold a lot of strength with me because it's been done before. I just hope that my original comment of being innovative and using the resources that are available within different communities or different areas, and the ideas put forward by different groups should be, at least, not so much acted on, but looked at. There are a lot of good ideas out there and there are a lot of new companies coming on the scene that have good capabilities, and I think we have to consider what they're proposing and, again, look at different ways of accommodating the needs. Again, these are needs of communities.

Some of the statements were that needs vary from one area to another. Again, every time, on every page, we see where projects are allocated. It's not necessarily based on need. There are all kinds of reasons why projects are put in certain places. But I won't get into that because I might get my ears slapped.

I just want to make the point that if there are capabilities, with proper financing and proper management, we should be looking very hard at the abilities of a community to do a certain project. Mahsi.