In response, I can again express the disappointment we had in regard to the commitment not being fulfilled. We kind of lost a bit of faith. This convention is kind of creeping in and pushing custodial management aside, because these conventions are nowhere near custodial management.
Like I said, they're marginally different from the original, right? It's more fluff and stuff than anything, but there's some dangerous fluff and stuff, especially with regard to the sovereignty issue and of course a process that is now binding with regard to arbitrating disputes.
But to get back to it, you're right, we felt let down. We still feel let down. We're still adamant about custodial management. We can banter back and forth about what was said in this letter and what was said in that letter, but I think we had to be clear. And I think the position of the government is clear: they're supportive of these conventions and they believe these conventions give us the management we need. We say it's totally inadequate, we have no faith in NAFO under the present system, and again we're calling upon our government to really dig down into this.
We're pleading with you to dig down, put aside all this rhetoric, and really get to the meat of it. Perhaps the best way to do that is to put it for debate in the Parliament of the country and let everyone have a good, solid debate. Then we can get into not who said this or who said that, but what this is going to do for our country.