I think we need all of it, but the question in front of all of us is whether it's our household budget or our national budget there are only so many things we can do.
The reason I'm pushing for a framework is that the question of whether we have enough investment in the science is best answered in a framework saying where it is we want to go and what the priorities are.
I wouldn't say there's any overall we can drop the science, but what I would say, coming from the science community, is it should be done in parallel. You don't need to stop and say we don't need to do something now until we figure out what the cycling is.
In terms of management of the discharge of contaminants, of persistent contaminants, of nutrients, we know that those things should be done. There are lots of things on the ground that conservation authorities and others, and municipalities, can be doing, but it needs to be done in parallel.
But decisions need to be made, and it should be done in a framework to suggest which of this information is most likely to move us ahead. I think it's just a management approach.