I have three questions myself. Throughout the discussion, I believe we're talking about the APF and looking at the future—not just at the problems we're facing today and the business risk management design, but looking at the future. There were some comments made during the presentations and through questions and answers that I want to throw back at you.
You talked about more value-added. A number of you mentioned that we have to have that. I think one term was “distinct value to the buyer” in making the nutraceuticals and some of the new product lines out there that are going to be grain-based or livestock-based products. What about distinct value to the producer, making sure the trickle-down is there?
The second question I had was on the next generation of farmers. We talk about trying to maintain the family farm operation. I'm a farmer, my dad was, and my granddad was, and it goes on and on, back even into Europe. The question becomes this: it's easy for our kids to leave and to enter into new professions, but what about urban kids? It seems to be extremely difficult for them to come out and join the agricultural culture and society that we have. How do we make this work, so that you may not necessarily have had to grow up on a farm to actually own it and operate it in the future?
The final comment I had, which actually goes back to a comment Mr. Jacobson made, is that during the first round of talks on APF, five or six years ago, SAF felt that the whole process had been predetermined, that you were just a participant listening to what was going to happen and did not necessarily have any input.
I ask this of all of you who participated in the first and second rounds of talks on APF 2: do you feel this is the case today, or do you think, based upon the comments that have been coming back from provincial and federal ministers, that they are listening?
I ask for comment back on those three areas.
Mr. Jacobson.