I don't know what is involved in those private arrangements. What I can say is that there are organizations, fish producers, entering into business arrangements with ENGOs to have those ENGOs review their purchasing lists or help them sell their products to foreign buyers, by demonstrating that their products are sustainable, and helping them to get there. Loblaws has actually publicized the fact they are working with ENGOs to help them look at their purchase list to determine what is sustainable and what's not. What's involved in that business arrangement, I can't tell. Obviously those organizations could probably give the committee the information.
In dealing with the information, the processes of some of these organizations are outdated. I'm not going to name names, but I will tell you there are organizations that have outdated stock assessment reports on which they will base their conclusions. I'm not ascribing wrong or false intentions to these organizations; they may just not have access to the up-to-date information or, more importantly, they may not have the staff to make sure they do have the updated information. Conclusions are reached and those conclusions are published on websites and are picked up by chef X or cookbook Y. This situation has proliferated and there's a danger of having information out there that is not accurate and leads to conclusions that can have impacts on our fishing industry.
There are also biases built into some of those assessments. We have seen some of these biases, either in anti-farm or anti-certain types of gear products, like trawls and others, built into the policies of these ENGOs, who will then automatically put the products coming from these fisheries on their web lists.