I will take a stab at that, and then I'll ask Monsieur Labonté to continue.
First of all, thank you for that. We do recognize that fishermen and scientists do need to understand each other and we need to work closely together. We are trying to do that better and will continue to do so.
The advisory process within the department is not limited to the department, as you may know. We bring together all the experts we can find on a given stock. In terms of northern gulf cod, for example, we have had extensive advisory processes including not just DFO scientists, not just the scientists who work on a given stock, but all those who have input. We bring in industry and academics and put together a very rigorous peer review process for any of these things. We do our best to provide the best scientific advice we possibly can.
There are always those who will disagree with the recommendations or with decisions that come out subsequent to the science input on both sides, but my feeling is that we do, and continue to, provide the most expert advice that we possibly can.
On the shrimp issue, I am less familiar with that so I'll ask Monsieur Labonté to speak to it.
My main message is that I agree with you. We do need to provide the very best scientific information that we can. We take that responsibility very seriously. Not all will agree with everything, but it is a peer review process, and at the end of the day, everybody who participates is part of that advice, which is then taken in conjunction with socio-economic information.
Serge.