Thank you very much, Chair.
One of the things we heard in the last series of presentations on SARA was from a panel of scientists who were talking about the importance of looking at different juxtapositions and contrasting science versus socio-economic impacts and injecting a level of clarity and transparency and openness in both consultations and in the timelines and reporting of those timelines.
I understand the resistance by Dr. Quinney to a process that hasn't been particularly fruitful as yet. When you see the numbers you brought forward, it's very compelling. But one of the things we have heard is that now we're five years in, we're much further along, and there's going to be an increase in the numbers of action plans and recovery strategies. It took that long to get going.
My question is more specific than that. When you talk about the efforts that organizations such as yours, comprised of active, engaged individuals who care very much on a personal and on a recreational level for the natural spaces and the wildlife that inhabit them and their actions toward preserving that, how is that in theory in contradiction with having a strong, clear regulatory regime? Or is it really just a question of in practice? Because as you say, if they don't pick up the phone it ends up not being effective as a process.