I have the voluntary code here. It contains a number of issues and problems that have been severely criticized. They are what made us decide to vote against the code in its present form. Of course, the tolerance level of 5% was a problem. In Europe, they have a tolerance of 0.9%. There are various tolerances, but they are often in the region of 1%.
In my view, one of the most insidious things about this code is that it comes with obligations. I mentioned that in my presentation. If you want to make any mention of GMOs in a product, you have to follow the voluntary code. So then, there are steps in place that are not compatible with it. For example, it even became an obstacle for flour organizations and producers in Quebec. They wanted to tell consumers clearly, to the best of their understanding, that their products did not contain GMOs. But they were not allowed to do so because their logo, their trademark, did not conform to the code.
On the one hand, no company has voluntarily indicated that its products contain GMOs. On the other hand, those companies that wanted to show that their products did not contain any were not able to do so. That is the extent to which the code is rigid and inflexible. You can easily criticize the code from a number of perspectives.