Thank you. I appreciate your candour, your frankness. Nobody would expect, I don't think, with these kinds of significant changes, that you would be able to make that kind of commitment.
In terms of hubris, we see all kinds of that already coming from government members, not necessarily on this committee, but there have been times, in terms of what these changes will and won't do, so I think you're okay in saying that you don't need to bring any with you.
The whole question of the precautionary principle is something that was raised quite a bit in Commissioner Cohen's report, particularly the responsibility of the department to be able to protect fish habitat. I know that now it's not about protecting habitat, that it's about protecting fish.
I'm going to ask you two things.
The first thing is that the funding for the sustainable aquaculture program is down $17 million. I want to ask you why.
The second thing is on the ability of the department, in the case for example of finfish aquaculture, to protect wild stocks, whether they be salmon, crustaceans, mackerel, herring or whatever.
Would you comment, please, on the ability of the department, as a result of the changes, both in terms of resources and in terms of legislation, to ensure that our wild stocks of salmon, crustaceans, herring, mackerel, and so on are in fact going to be protected by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans officials?