Thank you very much.
I'm going to continue what was asked earlier on.
What's happening today has the potential for significant change, positively or negatively, not only in the grain industry but in our rural way of life and in our country, as we know it. In other words, this is nothing short of a revolution, for lack of a better term. That's what I see in front of me. In retrospect, with revolutions, we always say there could have been a better way of doing this rather than changing drastically and having thousands and millions of people suffer. Russia is still recovering from the 1917 revolution, to put that in context.
You've been tasked to do this. In your opinion, could there have been a better way to examine the grain industry, to involve all players to come up with an evolutionary path, a fairer way to go than a one-month report? We're not sure how much of a comprehensive economic analysis was done.
My other question follows my colleague's point. Who is the loser? We've heard that while this company or that company may be a loser, what about the average grain producer in western Canada, not the person who is near the border who can farm and does custom farming from somebody else and has access to markets? What about someone near Blaine Lake, for example, where I spent summers as a kid? Let's look at the primary producer. We're all here because the primary producer is our number one focus.
Is he or she going to be the loser, and could there have been a better way? See if you have enough time to answer these questions.