Yes, we're agreed on that point. And I don't know why it would be up to me to tell you.
In any case, if we see the opportunity to reinvigorate the public broadcaster because of new technologies, new media, new opportunities to get the stories out there in different ways, perhaps this becomes one of those historic moments when you do that. If we get caught up in the narrow debate around whether we should do this because it isn't distinctive enough and all of those kinds of things, I think it will be a distraction, frankly.
Now, the other part of this--and I'm all over the place today, as I warned you--has to do with the place of the CBC being one of a series of partners with a general objective. I think in the past the public broadcaster was seen as it, as against one of many, the leader among many institutions that perform this function. I think that may be a part of the mandate we have to rethink.
If people have come from Telefilm Canada, the National Film Board, and other places, even other channels on the range of channels that are available now, with an interest that might be complementary, if we could organize ourselves, if CBC assumes a leadership role on that front, I think we may have an opportunity. But it would have to be in the mandate of the CBC to say that, because right now institutionally they're not structured that way. Most of the other people have complained about that fact, that the CBC's view has been if it's going to be done, we have to do it--and I don't mean just in terms of in-house production, but just generally to be the entity in the country that protects our sovereignty and so on.
There hasn't been a consensus here on whether the mandate needs to be changed. Some have said it does and some have said it doesn't. Very specifically on that question, is it adequate as it stands if it's resourced?