Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess the government has a lot of examples of something that started as symbolic has grown to become an expected amount to be spent by government. Within Finance, if we want more revenues and we are directed to get more revenues, we can do that. We can establish a new tax, a new mark-up and we can call it what we want but that money always goes back into general revenue. Then it's the Assembly overall that makes a decision on how that money is spent. So instead of getting hooked up on this page, it's more as a government during our business plan process. If it's felt that this government should establish a set amount for prevention on the addiction side of the scale, that should be done through the business planning process in an overall government target set, not initially through a fund of this nature. Anything we raise, whether it's a tax, a mark-up from tobacco sales, we could do the same thing for tobacco taxes saying we should target that because it causes a horrendous problem when we talk about people in our facilities, lung cancer and so on.
The issue would be more appropriately as a government overall through our business planning process, if we feel it is necessary to target an amount that would go into that and not get caught up in sales of products. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
