Absolutely, it's a common refrain we've heard from some of our companies.
From both examples I gave you, whether it's the mustard seed into jet fuel or the non-browning apple, both of those companies went through long regulatory processes that they felt were probably too long. In fact, the apple one received FDA approval in the U.S. long before it was received here in Canada.
Can it be better? Absolutely it can.
The only point I would make, though, is that the brand that we have is not just the maple leaf. It is the fact that we do good science and we do have a really good regulatory policy. That's what is recognized. We would never want to lose that, because I do believe that is a competitive advantage. Can it be more streamlined? Can it be more efficient? Yes, it can.
From a promotional standpoint, having those out in the trade commissions would be useful. Probably more important, though, would be to beef up our regulatory capacity here by adding more scientists who are able to keep pace with the change, because when we're talking about this type of change, it is very rapid, with huge leaps in many cases. Keeping up with that would be extraordinarily important. It would be a very good objective to increase our capacity for handling this, because we're at the tip of the iceberg. We're looking at a lot more innovation coming. It's not like it's going to decrease, and it's a competitive advantage for us to be out there in front of all this. It seems to me from an economic standpoint that it makes great sense to do that.