Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It's true that this can't be viewed as a negotiation. From the commission's standpoint, we see the efforts that we're engaging in as being a clarification of where we need to be, of where the commission needs to be, in terms of delivering its treaty mandate.
We've also expressed a number of solutions, as you've pointed out—the move to GAC, the machinery-of-government change, as well as the MOA—because there's a need to future-proof what we're doing. This has been a serious distraction and a serious take-away from the work of the commission over the last number of years. Opportunities are being missed in terms of partnerships that might be there, and in terms of advancements and protections of the Great Lakes, and so on. We want to make sure that, when we're no longer in these roles, and when the folks at DFO are no longer in these roles and there are new people in those seats, we are future-proof and the will of Parliament and the will of Congress will be adhered to.