Well, it's probably a bit early days on that, but it has kind of ensured that the whole chain, from fishing to the market, is traceable, and in such a way that it is caught in a sustainable fishery. It's a kind of certification for that.
I would really like to comment about your earlier question, if I may. In Iceland we do not have these restrictions about quotas going between different vessel types. It's much easier in that sense. What I would say is that the best thing for Canada is to have clearly defined rules. You may want to have set ship or vessel types, which is a political decision, but have a fairly simple system whereby you set the rules and leave the politics out of it, and do not meddle in it on a year-to-year basis.
That has been the experience from Iceland. The industry itself has developed in such a way that, because of the system, it's now one of the most highly profitable fishing industries in the world, and the most technically advanced fishing industry in the world. Also, part of that, to get into premium markets, is the certification, whether it is the Icelandic certification program, or the Marine Stewardship Council's, or something else.
From the management side of it, which is where I come from, in terms of what this has really helped, in a sense, is that the industry is realizing that, as the Norwegians said, it's the quality, not the quantity, and that it's better to sell in a premium market where you have the certification. That really says that you do not get certification if you do not fish by the rules and if you're not fishing from a sustainable stock. In a sense, that helped the debate on management a lot, and where you should follow advice, etc.
