I wish I could be specific in that way, but I certainly agree with the conclusions. I would say yes, the process measures seem very heavy, but I would be a little concerned about giving you the impression that they're no good. A great deal of work over many years at Statistics Canada and Health Canada has gone into developing programs. As I think we just heard Mr. Glover say very tactfully, they're doing the best they can, sometimes in a funding drought because there are no obligations defined in the legislation.
So the work at the scientific level that does get done is often a good foundation and a good building block, but as I pointed out in my testimony, it is not focused in a meaningful way, in a way that relates to the interventions that CEPA brings to bear. Part of that is that some of the interventions haven't been brought to bear, but what we really need is tight regulation that's very clearly focused on specific things, with evaluation frameworks that are designed to measure the impact of the policy intervention.
I don't think we're there yet. The legislation has not been constructed or certainly has not been implemented in a way that allows us to measure progress. That is where I think, quite rightly, your thinking is going, and I very much support the conclusion you've just come to.