No, I'm just kidding.
I think that's the fundamental challenge. We've all alluded to the fact that much of the export market is dealing with those issues. For example, when we were in Belgium in the spring, we chatted with officials from the Canadian embassy. They had no sense that from a beef producer's perspective, CETA was a problem: most Canadian farmers aren't going to raise beef the way they do to export to that market.
In any food policy you look at, I think there has to be an element not just of self-awareness in terms of the domestic market, but also, when you're looking at export markets for Canadian products across the board, what are we facing? It's such a range. When you look at China and Japan, the standards are here and here. Then you have the EU, where the standards are much different. What would be very beneficial, from our perspective, is anything government could do to....
I was down in the States last week, and I was talking to the board of directors of NAMI. One of the things Trump has done well is the “two for one”. For every one regulation you want to introduce, you have to take two off the board. I think that would be a really healthy review for the Canadian government to look at. One of the criticisms that I've certainly heard from our members is that while CFIA does a fantastic job in terms of regulating, there's just so much regulation that it's really hard to keep up with it. Sometimes there's a feeling that there's no consultation. A regulation is imposed from Ottawa, but there's no appreciation for what it's like on the farm. There's no thought process. There's insufficient consultation.
With all of the externalities that Canada faces, I think that would be a really important consideration. If you could take a look at all the regulations facing industry and sort of evergreen them, I think that would be very helpful.