I hope you picked up in my comments that I don't think we have a problem around food. We have plenty of food out there. This is not an issue related to production. My main point has been about how we fairly and equally distribute the food that we already produce.
Globally we produce way more calories than we need. I have a deep concern—and I'd love Evan's comments on this as well—when you look at a goal of $75-billion export. I'm not sure where that's going. If you want to try to underpin a more sustainable agricultural system, when you are pushing more and more food out the door, it puts huge pressure on the land and the soil. Therefore, I want to push back against the kind of “get big or get out” approach that we often see in our agriculture policy, often aimed at export.
I would like to see much more focus on supporting organic and sustainable farmers and helping people to transition, and acknowledgement that that's an important route to go. I don't see much evidence of that when you see where the expenditures in agriculture go. There are huge opportunities to create land that is nurturing, that creates really good food.
I am trying to triangulate the idea of health, sustainability, and a good economy. A national school nutrition program is one of those approaches that brings together all three. You can support kids to eat well, do well in school, and build food skills, but if you put a mandate in on how you procure that food, you can also support a local rural economy.