It seemed to me you said that you were growing both GM and non-GM, that obviously you're making a business decision on what you want to do based on your farm.
I have some great organic farmers in my riding, and obviously there is a concern. I'd have to have that discussion about all the fault goes with the conventional farmer and none of the responsibility goes in terms of cost and compensation with the organic. I think that's part of what we have to resolve, quite honestly. It's like a zero tolerance. There is no such thing as zero tolerance. So we have to work on some sort of low-level presence.
Actually, I'm very much interested, because in the soybean industry in Ontario, they're 65% GMOs and 35% non-GMOs. We have been successful in hitting very competitive markets that are very stringent within their criteria.
Jim, you had mentioned, actually, that you would likely be comfortable at 0.1%, or if you had to meet it, you could do that. Is there an attitude change? Is there some change that's happening in terms of country perception of GMs outside of conventional product? We heard the other day that actually the EU now is considering and will accept feed coming into their country with GMOs in it. Does there seem to be a shift in attitude towards that? Is it driven only by the large companies, the Monsantos or whatever of the world? Have they had that big of an impression on these countries? Or do they see this is something they have to adapt to? And the communication gap to the general public has to change away from perception to a reality, if that's in fact what the case is.