I have two or three questions on it.
In the event that the protected knowledge was a sacred site, I think it would be advantageous for the public to know that it was a sacred site. I think they would avoid it, whereas the chances are that people would go into it otherwise, so the rationale doesn't hold water for me, anyway.
I have another question, through you, Madam Chair. Does this same kind of protection of knowledge qualify or is it available for local fishermen? I'll use it in that sense. Basically it sounds like the aboriginal information can be held because maybe it's the honey hole. Well, the same thing should apply, in my opinion, for fishermen. Does it or doesn't it? Is it equal, is what I'm asking.