I'd like to answer that. One of the biggest problems we've got down here—and I referred to it before when I was talking—is that we have all these advisory meetings and we spend a lot of time in advisory meetings. I know I do, and everybody here does. But when push comes to shove, what we come up with in advisory meetings we have no way of knowing if that's what the minister is getting to read, because a bureaucrat writes a briefing note, and because it's interdepartmental communications we're not allowed to see it.
I think the advisory board should be involved in writing the briefing notes to the minister, and then, when the minister makes a decision, we know she made her decision on the facts she read or it's just a personal decision.
I'd like to just let you know another consequence of this decision, and it's too bad. This whole fleet has a great rapport with science and we work with science well and we fund science. But because of this decision that the minister made of all the core licence holders, we're not paying for science any more. There was a bit of money from the Larocque decision that's been going into science, but as far as I can see, when that's done, science is done for this snow crab fishery down here, because until we get equal sharing, there are a lot of people who are going to say they're not paying for science—they're not getting enough out of it, so why should they pay to get other people more crab. It's too bad.