Thank you, Chair.
I wanted to explore the inspection of incoming products and products that we're exporting.
I know on the committee in the many different studies we've done we've had a number of witnesses--associations, groups, farmers--come in front of us and they are really looking for harmonization. They want to see harmonization at the border. It moves product, especially I'll say with the United States, where I think we do the bulk of our trade. Certainly I think this committee has received the message loud and clear that it is better, it is more efficient, it is more effective to harmonize, and what that means is not doing the work twice.
I want to follow up on what Mr. Storseth was saying and what Mr. Allen was saying, in that Canada inspects 100% of the product being exported, you're saying, so there is an inspection certificate. If we're harmonizing with, for example, the United States and if they accept our certificates, and they're doing 100% inspection of their exports to us, and we're accepting their certificates, I'm wondering if you can comment on that.
The other thing I'd like you to comment on too is the idea of high risk versus low risk. You made a comment on it previously, but I think we should explore that, because I think it's valid. There is a vast quantity of low-risk materials that come in that aren't inspected at all. When you're talking about this 2%, I'm taking it that for the 98% a portion of that is falling into the low-risk category and we don't need to inspect those. Could you comment on that as well?