Barley, I think, is a foregone conclusion. I think what's really at play here is wheat. We haven't had a plebiscite, and we know that the new board is being set up to reflect the views of the minister, that he's trying to get as many people who reflect his views as possible, through appointment and through election, and that they have a year to sabotage the Wheat Board.
Right now he's asked that members of the board or the board itself not promote itself, not talk about the good things they can do. He's fired the president and CEO for doing that. So there's a good year or year and a half during which the new board can sabotage the Wheat Board and create a negative vote amongst farmers.
Those are my concerns. I have no problem if in the new world, should the farmers choose, that board reflects that view. That would even be necessary, I believe. But in the meantime we still have the single desk. I believe the board should promote the single desk and bring aboard expertise.
Mr. Motiuk is a producer and he comes on the board representing that point of view, as do the other elected ones.
You, Mr. Johnson, are being brought in, I suspect, in the expertise category. Mr. Easter has made a good argument that your expertise might be questionable. I have no details on that; I have no information. But I do know that you're very much opposed to the single desk system; you don't believe in the single desk. But you're being asked to promote it; you're being asked to make it survive. And that's a dilemma, in my mind.