In the area of own use imports and grower requested own use, we are supportive of pursuing the ultimate goal of NAFTA labelling where there's no need for people to be transporting chemicals across a border that is a figment of people's imaginations. We'd like to see harmonization there. If the way to do that, as Pulse Canada and other national associations have suggested in the OUI task force, is to pursue GROU instead of OUI at this point in time, then we're supportive of that. Again, the ultimate goal is NAFTA labelling and all producers having equal access to the chemicals they need for producing a crop.
With regard to research, we provide 50% of our funding to research. If we grew more pulse crops, based on the fact that we're at a 0.5% levy deduction, we would be able to provide more. At present, it ranges between $175,000 and $250,000 a year that we provide to research in Manitoba.
Certainly that's not anywhere comparable to what the province or the federal government provides in their budgeting, but we feel it's an indication of priorities—to provide signals to other areas in order to ensure that the necessary requirements are being done, including basic research in genetics and agronomics; to ensure that the crop can be produced so that there is an opportunity for value-added opportunities in Canada and in Manitoba; and to ensure that those other industries flourish based on the fact that we're providing a good basis for that.
In the area of production insurance, it has been very positive for producers to have production insurance. As I mentioned, we think price determination is an issue still. We don't disagree with linkages with CAIS. We think that makes sense as long as you're not double paying, or not having those types of issues arise as far as indicating participation in CAIS, and you're buying production insurance coverage.