I think it's a good question.
Without downplaying the importance of a business risk management program and a good framework for that, which is needed, one of the key things we need to do in the next generation of the agricultural policy framework, as I said earlier, is to have more strategic investment in sectors or areas with more flexibility where there is opportunity to grow the sector and grow the industry. We need a focus on the total value chain in terms of how you produce and provide benefits all the way through the chain, from the processors down through to the primary producers that improve the bottom line and the net income of producers. These would be areas of research, innovation, infrastructure--those kinds of things.
How do you translate the environmental programming and food safety programming and everything to improve the bottom line for producers? We can't continue to always do it through risk management programming. We need to find the types of flexibility and strategic investment, whether it's tax treatment, investment in marketing, or investment in research that end up improving the bottom line of primary producers.
A focus on domestic marketing and branding, as well, is something that needs to be looked at. One of the frameworks of the first policy framework was the branding Canada program, which was a good program focused on branding Canada in the international market. I think what was missing in that part of it was branding Canada or branding food production in the domestic market to convince consumers that they need to pay more for Canadian product. We have a cheap food policy in B.C. and in Canada. We need to find a way that improves the returns to producers through that type of strategic investment.