I have a couple of points to make, and hopefully we can get to the vote soon.
You mentioned other countries. Brazil is a successful producer of GMOs. It has similar rules in place to what we're trying to propose with this bill. The department itself is looking at market access in regard to their proposal for low-level tolerance, so it's already being looked at.
Of course, industry doesn't want this bill. Monsanto, CropLife, and Syngenta are putting pressure on all of us. They don't even want to have this healthy discussion here. They're putting fear into the farming organizations. They're going to withdraw all sorts of research and development. I think we, as parliamentarians, have a chance to ask who do we represent, farmers or these corporations?
And I think we have the right to ask them next time they lobby you, are they prepared to cover the costs if we introduce genetically modified alfalfa and wheat, which is what his bill is targeting, to reimburse farmers when they lose markets in other countries? All this bill is looking at is the impact of potential markets. It has nothing to do with stifling research. There's tremendous research and development that has gone in this country, and virtually all of it has been with non-GM traits.
We have markets. All we're saying with this bill is, look, let's put that little insurance there so our farmers don't take a hit. Actually, I'm hoping there will be other colleagues from other parties who come on board with this bill so we can make the distinction: do we support farmers or do we get on this corporate bandwagon and continue to be mouthpieces of this industry?
Thank you, Mr. Chair.