Thank you very much.
I have a couple of questions.
As we explore the mandate review, as you pointed out, the requirement for the country is going to be broader than a narrow debate on the mandate of the CBC or broader than a “conventional mandate review” kind of discussion. The funding issue has to be put squarely on the table. If we, as a committee, can agree on both the importance of and the nature of the contribution of the CBC, then the funding discussion can follow that. Unfortunately, it has been so much about funding that we've never gotten past funding and to actually talking about how the value of the CBC would warrant the investment. That's where I hope this goes.
So I have a couple of questions. First, in terms of this more general review of how we advance Canadian culture or Canadian identity—all of the issues that I think you spoke to—very specifically, what do you believe the role of the CBC is in that? That has been the subject of some discussion. Should there be a narrow role in terms of content, in terms of production, and so on? Should it be broader than that?
I heard you say the content is what counts and that the delivery systems are less important than the quality of the content. In terms of getting from where we are to where we would like to be in five years, what's the role of the CBC in that exercise?
Whether you said it out loud or it's in one of the documents here, you also said there have to be adequate funding mechanisms. Could you just clarify that? Is there something beyond public investment in that description? You talked about the fact that we should try to avoid commercial financing, so I'd like to know about that.
And then I'd like you to elaborate a little bit on the nature of the profile exercise you were talking about, relative to the board.