I appreciate what you're saying; however, other sectors don't have it. Bankruptcy protection is really an industry lead, not an agriculture lead, but other sectors don't have it. If you sell a perishable product, such as a Christmas tree, to someone in Ontario and that company goes bankrupt, after December 25 it's no good to you. You can't get it back, and you have no protection whatsoever. I just wanted to put that out there. It is a problem and it is not totally resolved.
To Mr. Dahl, the whole issue with the non-science-based approach to agriculture is more than problematic; it's dangerous. It's dangerous to the sector and it's dangerous to the future of our economy. What I'm a little bit shocked about is the situation, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, with the neonicotinoids in Ontario. My understanding is that in other provinces that's been addressed mainly through dust management, when the seed is actually put into the ground, and you therefore have a lot less bee kill or bee damage. In Ontario they are saying that on the one hand they are not going to allow neonicotinoids, and on the other hand they have a real tight regime on beekeepers. If you live in suburbia you can't keep bees. You can't keep bees within 70 feet, I think, of a property line. That effectively eliminates a lot of little hobbyists who would perhaps keep bees, which are of huge assistance, the spark plugs of agriculture.
I think there is a disconnect there. Have you kind of pushed back on that?