I'd like to return to what I was trying to get across before. In all fairness to Randy, I had a good talk with him about this--I hadn't talked to anybody else--and I had two concerns.
One was about the whole time element and the fact that this is a very cumbersome procedure, and by the time we get going it may be into April, it may be later. My other concern was that by having a public meeting, this may turn into a forum of for and against the Wheat Board, and I don't know if that's appropriate, to try to see who can outdo whom in getting witnesses. That was a concern I expressed to him.
I thought that it would be a win-win situation for everybody, because I know that one of the reasons Randy would like to do this--and correct me if I'm wrong--is that he would like to quiz the Canadian Wheat Board on what's happened, and he has every right to do so. We have some questions too, and I think we could probably do this more quickly if we brought Ian White and a couple of directors here under our competitiveness category or somewhere that could happen soon. I think it could happen probably in a couple weeks so Randy--I'll be honest--can get his answers. He has a right to get his answers soon, so we don't have to wait until maybe May or maybe in fact this may be postponed until the fall.
That's my only concern about this. I'm sure that one of the reasons is that Randy would like to get some answers, not the only reason but one reason, and I just think it's really cumbersome and it will take too long.