Thank you, Mr. Chair. Continuing on the arts theme, you know, as was raised, the switch to ITI has been announced as part of the Budget Address, and so I think that there's -- you know, there's reason for a little bit of concern from the arts community that, you know, the optics of putting the arts under ITI as opposed to, you know, a cultural department is that it kind of indicates that what we're moving toward is trying to kind of treat the arts as sort of a monetized or economic development initiative. And I would say that I think that, you know, investments in the arts is a big piece of economic development. But in terms of the amount of money that the arts are able to leverage, there's a lot about the arts that are culturally-based, and it's not all about just simply monetizing art. There's money that organizations can leverage from the federal government and private investment that they can leverage through kind of growing organizations, through operating funding, through kind of growing a community around the arts. So I just -- I want to emphasize that and just emphasize to the department that there are aspects to the arts that they can use to leverage more funding and bring more funding into the territory that are not necessarily related directly simply to monetizing their work. And I'm not suggesting that the Minister is suggesting that that's what's happening, but it's just the perception that could be had through the switch to ITI. So if the Member has any -- or sorry, if the Minister has any comment on that kind of perception and how the department is managing that, I'd appreciate it. Thank you.