Let's not underestimate the importance of a national dialogue. This crisis will require us to look at our forest regimes and the species to be preferred for reforestation, given the increase in these infestations. The discussions will be very upsetting, and will also be difficult in many ways.
Holding these discussions with each province separately is very complicated, which explains the Forest Products Association of Canada's strong interest in establishing a national discussion forum. FPAC is negotiating with many officials and representatives of the Canadian Forest Service to see if it is possible to broaden the scope of some of the national dialogues that primarily affect research and the new vision of the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers.
We anticipate that further, much more intense discussions on these changes will be required. In our view, many of the legal foundations of existing forest regimes do not allow for the necessary changes, particularly in terms of rethinking forest composition. Indeed, the law currently requires reforestation with the same species, and the parameters governing the recovery of species at risk are static. These two constraints force us to claim that we will succeed in restoring forests to their former state, knowing that this will not happen.
So we will have to face a major conflict if we continue to invest in one direction, while the forest has to go in a completely different one, and we will be up against the wall. This change will be very upsetting, and we will wonder how sure we will be of our approach, how ready we will be and on what scale we will be able to implement these political changes. These are big questions. It is indeed difficult to discuss it with each of the provinces separately, just as it would be equally irrelevant—