I would agree with everything that's been said so far. I think providing for analyses of alternatives to projects, plans, and policies is one function that would be very important for an independent information agency, because right now, too often, alternative scenario development is left in the hands of a proponent who has all the interest in the world in portraying alternatives to this project as not feasible or impossible.
What sort of system can we trust? When we come to science, often peer review is one way to trust. That would be one key point. Ensuring the independence of the institution would be key. I think that's a failure across the board in the federal law reform we're undertaking right now. It should be independent of both government and industry so that we can trust more what they do.
To go back to the fact that our current information is not transparent and proprietary, Thomas the Apostle believed in Jesus only when he saw the marks. I think if we can open up those models and see what's inside them, then we can trust them better. This is better than having someone say that although they're not going to show us what's in the box, we should go ahead and trust them anyway because the output is good. That doesn't work anymore.