That would be good, but watch out when you talk about consensus. The Fédération des producteurs de pommes du Québec, which, as I told you, has been handling the matter for 20 years, said that the decision made no sense. Its members were completely shocked by the decision and, moreover, still are.
Going back to food safety, particularly pet food, if I'm not mistaken, Mr. White, it was you who said, when you came and testified, that your agency wasn't directly involved in the matter of the health of pets. For it to be involved, the issue would really have to be related to human health. In other words, there would have to be a case of human contamination as a result of handling animal food.
Where does this matter stand? It's always the same thing: the media got a hold of it at one point, animals were sick, and some had even died. Have there been any changes? Has your agency asked for a little more power in this area, or is there still a legal gap? Does someone handle the matter when it concerns pets?