Thank you very much. I'm pleased that you were able to properly express what you meant. That's very interesting.
Mr. Vigneault, you put your finger on a very sensitive point. I've been emphasizing it since the start of the consultations. That is to say that I don't really need to emphasize, but I often come back to the same question.
You expressed in one or two sentences exactly [Technical difficulties - Editor], that is to say when you spoke about flexible programs, complementary programs. You said that one level that imposes its vision on the others was not necessary. We heard about that concern in a number of provinces, but not everywhere. There is still this annoying tendency, even within the committee and sometimes in government backrooms: the wish to centralize is expressed because it's thought that that's the best solution.
I want to remind everyone that, as regards the first component of the Agricultural Policy Framework, that is exactly what has happened. Extensive consultations were conducted, and the minister of the time, Mr. Vanclief, ultimately said that that was the Agricultural Policy Framework.
In Quebec, we realized that, although a lot of things were said during the consultations, those things did not appear in the Agricultural Policy Framework, which was imposed. This Ottawa-knows-best attitude still exists. I don't believe it's bad faith on the part of political decision-makers or even government officials and so on. They sincerely think this is probably the best solution. They know what is good for the people and they're going to implement it. However, we're conducting consultations as we're doing today, as the government has also done, because we want to know people's opinions.
Which is what you often repeat. I'd also like you to provide examples, with regard to the Agricultural Policy Framework, that show that we have our hands tied, that this has been imposed on us and that show that flexibility in programs and decentralization would be the best solutions.