Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank the guests for being here today. This has been very entertaining, and also very informative, more than anything else.
Mr. Rabinovitch, I understand what you're saying about the name change. I'll deal with that later, but first of all, you made the comment that the research will be only an “ancillary” device, more than anything else, given what's coming from the legislation. I want to touch on that a bit more, because I did ask Mr. O'Neill about this idea and about how the word “critical” was taken from the particular passage. Formerly, it was “knowledge and critical understanding of and appreciation”, whereas now it just says “understanding”.
I got the feeling from Mr. O'Neill that there wasn't much of a difference, but I get the feeling from both you and Mr. Turk that there is a difference. What is that going to translate into? Because you also talked about a reduction in capacity to do research, the capacity for the museum to be something organic and something better than what it is now and to lend itself to the world. Could you comment on that?