I do take the point, Mr. Chair, that the inclusion of the CBSA in this discussion is necessary sooner or later. The reason I say that is that the CBSA, as has been pointed out, would be the ones who would be inspecting shipments heading out of the country, and we've heard in testimony in our IUU study that it's pretty easy to conceal elvers inside other stuff.
I would suggest, though, if we haven't done a deep enough dive into that aspect of it, that we add a meeting to the IUU study and burrow right into that one, because I think that's the other half of it. If we cut off the market, all of a sudden there's really no rationale for people to be out fishing for something they can't sell and there's no market for.
I think that piece of it has to be covered off, but the issue at hand is enforcing the laws we have right now, given that the shipping issues and CBSA-related issues are not going to be dealt with in time to prevent the drive for a fishery this year, especially an illegal one with that kind of value attached to it. We needn't dilute the focus by calling in the CBSA at this point, but I would suggest that we could add a meeting to the IUU study, which isn't really complete yet, to deal with that aspect of it.