Thanks very much for the question. I wouldn't want to stray beyond the two audits that we did put forward, and we didn't look at the scientific capacity of the government. I think your characterization on the measurement side, there were gaps.... I don't think this is a question of science as much as it is a question of whether there are measurement systems or accounting systems in place.
I think on the fish habitat it's a little bit different. There were some problems or commitments related to ecosystem indicators. By definition, those are based on science, and those have not yet been produced.
But I will say, just to remind the committee, that we were here in March and we said the development of the air quality health indicator was a model of using good science. So I wouldn't want to stray into a general characterization of the government's capacity on science.