Thank you very much, Mr. Marleau. I don't want to be repetitious, but this might be our last opportunity to thank you for your decades of service. You've really had a brilliant career, and there's a lot to celebrate as you look back, and hopefully as you look forward as well.
My question relates to the enhancements to the Access to Information Act that were contained in the Federal Accountability Act of 2006. I think you've indicated that this was the most far-reaching expansion of the Access to Information Act. What I want to get at here is that, in theory, opposition members seem to suggest that the Federal Accountability Act should have gone farther. But when you start to ask them for specifics, they fail to produce any. In fact, in some instances, members of the opposition believe the Federal Accountability Act went too far in expanding ATI.
For example, they opposed bringing the Wheat Board under coverage of the Access to Information Act. So what we see oftentimes is that you have certain interests that are particularly powerful constituencies to the opposition that cause them to depart from the overall principle of openness, but then in broad strokes and theoretical application, they say it should be enlarged. How do you view that contradiction?