Your brief is very good, but it's also a little abstract for someone like me who is not an expert in these issues. So could you give me an example of where the federal hammer has been used, and how your organization's approach would have been more supple and would have brought about better results? What reverberates with me in your message is that the traditional complaint from, for example, fishers in Newfoundland at the time the cod was undergoing a threat was that the biologists at DFO in Ottawa didn't know what they were doing and were mismanaging the fish stocks. So could you give me an example in your experience of where the federal hammer has been used and it's been counterproductive? And how would you have done things differently?
Your organization...again, I asked the question at the beginning. What sort of territory does it cover? Are there other organizations like yours that would complete the map of Canada, if you will? I'm sure you do excellent work, but whenever you're dealing with a territory as big as Canada, you need to bring some kind of rationality to bear, especially if you're going to have any kind of accountability at the government level. Your approach seems to be very much an on-the-ground laissez-faire approach. I'm not saying you're not successful, but we need to look at this in a comprehensive, rational way, or there's no accountability to Parliament.