Thanks for your comment on that. I agree, because in a previous meeting, when the scientific branch of DFO appeared before the committee, they referenced from time to time that often there is not agreement on the science.
I've been on this committee since 2015 and regardless of the study this committee has been doing, we've had scientists with reputable backgrounds, representing different organizations, quite often giving conflicting testimony before this committee. It's not the first time I've heard the comment that DFO is structurally broken. If it's structurally broken as it relates to science...because this study is not on the management. It's how science is used to provide information to the ministry to make key management decisions. When you get into these, every time you make a decision, there's somebody happy and there are quite a few unhappy. The ones who are unhappy will present their case, backed up by some peer review or scientific review, saying why they're right and the scientists at DFO had it wrong.
Could you comment?