We share your view. We want to stand up for conservation and long-term sustainability. We believe it is possible that one can achieve that kind of agreement in NAFO with other contracting parties.
We think this particular clause is a clause that has provided the thin edge of the wedge and that in 30 years' time--who knows?--it may be used in a way that is totally beyond what we can now anticipate. There is simply no reason for it. Because we are sovereign now, because NAFO has no rights inside, we can, as a sovereign state, make whatever decisions we want. If we want to invite a nation into our waters to do science, share technology, fish, or anything, we can do it.
There's no need for that clause in NAFO. That just simply provides a right and provides a basis in future arbitrations, perhaps, or in dispute settlements, for a party to say, “Well, it's in there that there are possibilities, so clearly Canada believes that we have a role in doing something within their 200-mile zone.”