Mr. Chair, can I just, for 30 seconds, respond to the gentleman's reference to this photo?
I was just checking my notes. I think if you're referring to a photo that was on cbc.ca that was tied to the Kyoto Accord, what happened--your description did not connect with my recollection of it--was that a photo was retouched. It wasn't retouched for use on air. It was retouched because people do that in the graphic world to see what kind of impact.... It was misfiled. First, it should not have happened, and, second, it shouldn't have been filed. It was inadvertently pulled out and used.
There was a very subtle difference. In fact, it looked very similar. We did check it. It was immediately pulled when we were aware of it. It was an inadvertent error. We're very conscious of whether there is any suggestion that that's done. It was one of these things that was done in a way that did virtually no damage and that, to our knowledge, had no kind of negative motive to it. It was a process error that we have ensured will not happen again. It was filed in a way that someone had access to it, and it appeared on our website very briefly.