Thanks to all of you for appearing today.
David, I'm going to start with you. Our party quite agrees with your proposition of a compelling food plan: a food strategy from gate to plate. We have been proposing it for years. It hasn't been forthcoming.
The Canadian Federation of Agriculture tried to come up with one. There are all sorts of different groups.... I see it as the responsibility of the federal government to bring all of the stakeholders together and prepare such a plan, as they did in England, in Scotland, and, as you know, in New Zealand, but we have yet to have one here.
I first want you to comment on the need for that, and who should be the group for or the leader of this initiative. That's number one.
Number two, you made an interesting comment. You said that once the plan is prepared, we needn't necessarily have regulations or rules attached to it, and that it has to be a vision. I disagree with you somewhat, largely because there's nothing that compels the vision to come to fruition, if you know what I'm saying.
For instance, there has been a lot of talk about the unnecessary amount of salt in our diet and the need to reduce salt in a lot of the processed products out there. The government had an opportunity to do that and didn't. I spoke to some in government and they said, “Well, we want people to have their choices.” It's an ideological thing: let them have their choices, right?
On the other hand, with respect to the railways, that would fall in your chart under trade and industry, I suppose, under increasing exports and improving competitiveness. For two years, farmers have been coming here saying they are getting ripped off by the railways. Nothing is happening. If you don't complement the plan with regulations and rules, nothing happens. I'd like you to comment on that latter part of my comment as well.