We're supposed to be principled, and if we can inflate and deflate the PIN number, so say, "Oh, now, now there are less people in need because we have less money," then I don't know how we can be accountable for the decisions we make and how we prioritize.

I guess I was just going to add that while we're talking about this now due to what Damien said, where everyone is shocked by seeing a 6 million people in need decrease in a context like DRC, where we know conflict is, you know, extreme levels.

There's, you know, climatic, uh, hazards and severe flooding and, uh, uh, all sorts across not just the Ituri and Kivus.

Um, this is also a problem that predates 2025, 2026, um, in terms of defining people in need.

I'm just thinking about, uh, a few, even before that, maybe 2022, 2023, when, um, there was a lot of, uh, just from my own experience, um, working on Ukraine, just a lot of humanitarian funding being used for social protection and for things that perhaps now we may draw that line as that's, that's no longer humanitarian.

So it does, it really does shift with the funding, and that's where I think what we're all saying is that where is that conversation? Where is that agreement on what is humanitarian need? And perhaps that would actually unlock a lot of, a lot of the issues.

And donors do...

We start with, uh, Olivia.