I'd say that overall in NAFO, the benefit of the onboard observers on vessels has probably been less than had been hoped for in the initial stages. With all of this stuff, we're talking about incremental progress. It isn't some glorious breakthrough we're talking about here; at best we're talking about incremental progress.
I would have to say that the single biggest step towards enhancing Canada's position with respect to protection of the stocks out there, certainly in the last 13 to 14 years—though someone could argue whether or not the turbot war might eclipse it—was the decision initially made under Mr. Regan's ministry and thereafter maintained by subsequent ministers to double the enforcement presence. That made a big difference in the level of compliance. We now have a pretty strong enforcement presence. The boardings and so on are a significant deterrent, in conjunction with the rule that if you're caught in a serious infringement you can be sent home. For somebody who's planning to come fishing for six months in the Northwest Atlantic and is caught after three weeks and has to go home, in today's world, with fuel costs and so on, that's a huge penalty, and far more significant than any fine you're likely to ever have.
We would hope to always have a commitment from the Government of Canada to pay for that level of surveillance, because it's a simple matter of sovereignty. Without it, I don't think it would be long before they went back to their old ways—some of them, at any rate.