I have a question for the commissioner.
A new scientific study on MPAs has just come out, which was recently conducted off the coast of California, that showed zero benefit to biodiversity, zero benefit to climate resilience and no evidence for increased regional availability of fishery abundance. What would your response be in the face of such evidence? Is this plan to create a network of underwater parks or marine areas just an exercise in virtue signalling? What does it accomplish, other than risking the collapse of the entire fishing industry, if studies like this are indeed accurate? If they aren't, what evidence do we have before carrying this out that the marine protected areas were actually based in science?