Yet we have the Auditor General saying that our post-market assessments and post-market surveillance in terms of drugs for humans are very different. What happens? I think for me that's the question. It's one thing to have something registered in law and say that you're supposed to do it in regulations, but does it happen?
The Auditor General said that we're not doing a very good job on adverse reporting on drugs. We're waiting. There are drugs that have been on the market for three years and nobody has bothered to act. The regulatory body has not bothered to act on this soon enough or to inform patients “and/or”,yet in Europe there is a very open and transparent way of doing this.
I understand the need to find balance between creating strong and viable agricultural products that we trade in—absolutely, good grief. It's an economic thing. But how do we really find the balance? I would like to hear that balance spoken to differently rather than being told that it's all working very well and everything is fine. I don't know of any system that's working well that isn't fine.
I don't know what happens to adverse reporting. I don't know if it's dismissed, because you told me it's 15 years before somebody re-evaluates, or at least that's what I heard you say. I need to clarify this, because my concern is about human health and safety.