I would like to follow up on the issue of tolerance with respect to pesticide regulation.
On May 9 last, I directed two questions to the minister. According to his response, his government had not had any discussions of this nature and no change had occurred. I have here the minister's response to the effect that no agreement had been reached either with the US or with other countries and that the health of Canadians would be protected.
The minister's response threw us off a little. We were not too clear about what he was trying to say. You claim that some discussions did in fact take place further to NAFTA and that these talks are continuing. Some groups in Quebec and in Canada are very concerned, most notably the Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides.
People ingest pesticides on fruits and vegetables. Apparently some residues pose a health risk. People often wonder what causes certain cancers, but what we ingest could also be responsible for the rapid rise in cancer rates.
Why consider allowing higher pesticide residue limits on certain fruits and vegetables? You are opening a door by saying that you plan to do a risk assessment. Canada and the US have a different climate. Why not close the door immediately? Otherwise, we will have to say yes to the US because of trade considerations. Since we already know that people's health could be at risk, why not adopt a zero tolerance policy?