In my earlier remarks, I highlighted what Mr. Jay Parsons' response was to me when I dissected and presented the CSAS process. When I say “lack of objective science”, I'm speaking about CSAS in relation to open-net cage fish farms.
When you have a proponent of fish farm company number one, and then the involvement of industry—which are fish farm companies two, three and four—and then stakeholders in multi-industry associations who can be brought in and who select people they're comfortable with to develop the terms of reference and to develop a list of who's going to review the science and develop a paper for peer review, there is no objectivity there.
If we were to pick another industry or another situation like tobacco, this would be utterly unacceptable to Canadians. It would be a very difficult time to pass the red-face test. I think Canadians deserve more. We need to move to an independent science stream in addition to DFO. That way, we could have shared methodologies and shared sampling, and the outcome would mean someone is going to have to take the tablespoon of Buckley's, and someone won't have to.