The answer is that preserving a share of quotas through the two-thirds mechanism is a marvellous concept if you're in a fish company. My answer, from a conservation perspective, is that 70% of zero is zero. I would suggest that if the industry is genuinely interested in protecting its shares and in having conservation as a goal, there's nothing wrong with saying that a two-thirds majority on issues of share allocation would be good. But we should have 50% on everything else. Otherwise, you will have nothing. You will never achieve lowering of quotas with a two-thirds majority required. If the industry is interested in that share protection aspect, why not simply have the two-thirds for the quotas and 50% for everything else?
Gus.