It would certainly be our earnest desire to make all the constituents feel much better about it.
The government policy as it relates to country-of-origin labelling is broader than just a food policy. It obviously reflects the reality that in the past there was recognition for labour costs, manufacturing costs, and other factors that were borne in Canada. They ultimately determined at the government's broader policy level that 51% of the direct costs of getting that product into the marketplace, whether it was the labour costs or otherwise, would determine whether a car is a U.S. car or a Canadian car, irrespective of where the parts came from. It's a much broader policy issue.
As it's been applied to food--and this is an area that we have agreed to revisit within the scope of the policy--again, there are issues on imported products. For certain classes of product, there are regulatory requirements that the product would have to indicate imported by or imported for. It would have to give information to consumers about whom they could contact them to verify where the product was actually from.
Again, we have also been looking at what's been done more broadly internationally. We've met with the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, which has made a proposal around a Canadian logo that would define that the ingredients themselves are Canadian-grown. We have started that type of analysis to ensure that we can bring our policy in line with ensuring that consumers have the right to an informed choice and can make the choice they would like to make in the marketplace.