Thank you for being here.
I'll try to be brief. In 2000, you mentioned that the growers were encouraged to invest heavily by government and industry and that many put their life savings into doing that. Then there was a market free fall. And then we talk about all stakeholders needing to contribute; and I agree with that, as I think it's a multi-faceted approach.
The first question is, would you then agree that even though all stakeholders need to take responsibility, the lead should be taken by the senior level of government because of the government's prior initiative to encourage more investment? In other words, yes, we can pass the cart around the table, but somebody has to take the bull by the horns—especially if it were our level of government that encouraged further investment—and take the lead to bring these people together. That's the first question.
And the second one is about an exit strategy and contraband. In an ideal world, we would solve the contraband issue and move into the exit strategy, and some people could stay in the industry and some could leave. But even though the initiative has been undertaken by our ministers to do that—and I thank them for that—to try to get the contraband under control, what we in fact have is a crisis situation, and we have to set priorities.
Would you agree, then, that we should be getting the federal government to take the lead? You know, the minister's response of March 31 that no money is available is not acceptable. The fact that there is no response to your suggestions is not acceptable.
So should we be demanding that the government take the lead to bring people together, to take the initiative, and to bear some responsibility, and also to do the exit strategy as we work on contraband? I'll just leave it at that.