I'll add a perspective here that we do have to be cautious. Often the use of neonics is pointed to as an overall reduction in pesticide use because quantities of that active ingredient are smaller in terms of volume, but what makes them problematic from an environmental perspective is that combined with their persistence and water solubility, they are active and they are toxic at very, very low levels in the environment, and they persist in the environment.
Therefore, we have to think a bit more broadly about how we make advances around pesticides and shift towards alternative agriculture. It can't be measured only in terms of volume used. It must also be measured in terms of toxicity, and again I want to reinforce what my colleague suggested earlier and encourage the committee to entertain a study on this broader issue of how Canada can support a shift so that we're not just jumping from the frying pan into the fire, trading one toxic chemical for another, and relearning the same mistakes over and over again. We could make a shift away from chemical-dependent agriculture.