The CETA is very positive in that it gets rid of tariffs, and certainly with the world environment we are in, being able to get rid of tariffs and conclude free trade agreements is very positive.
Where we have reservations is around our ability to continue to have stable access to that market, because of their regulatory systems and how they implement them for biotechnology and crop protection products. For example, during the negotiations of the CETA, there was a letter from the European minister to the Canadian minister saying that they will approve biotech traits of interest to Canada as fast as possible through their system. We saw in 2016 that this did not happen. In fact, there was an example involving a soybean trait, and Canadian growers lost out on an entire growing season because of political delays in the system. That had to do not with the science-based assessment process but with the implementation of that system through the political process.
What impact would that have on the canola sector going forward? That same thing could happen to us despite the commitment that was made in the context of the agreement. As we talked about, that means that when we grow a biotech trait, it will be present in the Canadian system, even if we decide to segregate a certain crop to go to Europe. Europe does not have a low-level presence policy, meaning that any presence of a trait that is not approved in the European Union would not be in compliance with their system.
As an industry, we would face a choice. Do we not commercialize that product? Do we not grow it, as happened with soybeans last year in Ontario? Do we not ship at all to Europe, or do we try to segregate and ship knowing that there's a real risk that we won't be in compliance with European regulations? That's where our concern comes from.