Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have two quick comments, and then maybe you could answer that last question I asked about the report in the U.K.
In regard to Mr. Weston's comment, I share some of that. I think we're getting two different pictures here, and it's hard to get to the bottom of what is the accurate picture of what's happening on the west coast. But there are a number of people who have, essentially, a vested interest in seeing a resolved situation.
You mentioned the ENGOs. You referenced their agenda, that either they have an agenda or they don't know enough—I think earlier you referenced that about the information on Slice or sea lice—and that they're able to communicate their position.
I'm just really curious as to why they would put so much energy and effort into something that isn't a problem. If I think of climate change, for instance, that's a whole other story, but it's almost the reverse situation, where we had scientists for years telling the story of this problem but couldn't get that out.
The other comment that I was a little surprised to hear was the reference when I said you've drawn a conclusion that there is no problem. When I asked you that, you said there's insufficient information; there's no information to point to there being a problem. So I wonder how you can conclusively say there is no problem and then say we don't have enough information to say there's a problem. Those are two different things, in my opinion, anyway.
But I wanted to see if you could comment on the U.K. study.