It's more the latter. They comprised public meetings, some one-on-one. Producer groups would ask us to come in and give them the lay of the land. There were a lot of group meetings, sort of inter-sector meetings, and a lot of one-on-one meetings--us and a commodity group, or us together with a horizontal farm organization. It took a variety of tools and mechanisms.
One of the things we did differently this time was select in each province what the provincial officials perceived to be leading-edge farmers who were demonstrating significant innovation in the business models, agronomics, or technologies they were using. We engaged them directly in new ideas to make sure we weren't getting stuck in a rut and hearing the same voices all over again.
So there has been a variety of mechanisms. There was an online tool. I think we've covered the waterfront on both the producer and processor side, as well as with the civil society groups that we deliberately engaged. The engagement process has been very comprehensive. The proof of the pudding will be in the outcome: what we mange to give back to the sector in terms of what we heard; and then making sure that last phase is comprehensive so we have a good vetting of the policies and priorities we propose.