I think we have to be very cautious in that area. There may be some possibilities to do some things along that line, but there are a couple of things.
First of all, companies may ask why they have to have the Canadian Grain Commission do outward inspection when the customer says he's happy with an SGS inspection. If there's ever a problem, it's not just companies that become involved; governments become involved. The EU becomes involved or MAF, the ministry of agriculture and forestry, in Japan becomes involved. Suddenly, they're looking at who's on record on the Canadian side. What government body do they look to in order to resolve this issue? They don't go to SGS and they don't go to Intertek. They go to the Canadian Grain Commission. If we have no role, it's very difficult for us to provide the services that we have provided in the past, that offer market access strength to Canada.
This is old news, perhaps not as relevant anymore, as it should be, but the Americans in the 1970s—I don't know the exact year—tried getting out of outbound inspections as a government agency and they had a wreck. Some shippers were adding water to corn, for instance, and it was growing by the time it got to the unload. Why that happened, I don't know. Perhaps there are other checks and balances we could put in place. But we have to be very cautious that we don't tamper with what has given us our Canada brand at the current time.