I would like to respond very briefly.
Thank you for your very interesting remarks, sir.
The first thing you seem to have a problem with is the fact that CSIC is not set up by a statutory scheme like so many federal or provincial matters or other organizations, such as engineers. I can share that problem in the sense of CSIC being different, but in order to understand the foundation of CSIC, one has to go back in history as to really who controlled immigration into Canada.
This was a matter litigated for many, many years. Finally, when the provinces didn't step in, the federal government did. The provinces had every opportunity under the BNA Act to step in, and they didn't. As I refer to in my paper, with respect, sir, we had a cowboy system, and it wasn't until the federal government finally did step in....
In some parts, you are right. The governance of CSIC could be improved, yes, but to say that we don't have fairness or transparency is simply not true. We do have transparency.
We'll find out all about transparency in June, when for the first time we will elect all our directors. What more transparency is there to that? If our members are unhappy, some of whom are, and they appeared before you, it's a small minority. The majority are happy.