Sorry, Mr. MacGregor; we have a fire alarm here, so I had to find a spot outside the building where I could hear. Hopefully my audio is okay.
When it comes to some of the specific language of the bill and how that would impact things, that's not really my area of expertise. I can comment on the biosecurity, the risk aspect, and how that would change the risk aspect.
From a risk aspect, if you change people's behaviours, you obviously change the risk. It comes down to, as Brian said, a low risk with a potentially high consequence. Overall, there are many good reasons that people shouldn't be trespassing on farms. Biosecurity is at the lower end of that risk for me. It varies quite a bit with the situation.
Right now, the biggest issue would be COVID and mink. Trespassers on a mink farm would be a substantial concern about COVID. As Brian mentioned, influenza coming in would be a potential concern. Beyond that, there aren't many people walking around in the street carrying a high-consequence animal disease that they're going to track in. We'd be worried mainly about people going farm to farm, if there was a trespassing event that went from one farm to another farm. You get into these scenarios where we can't do a cost-benefit assessment very well because we just don't have the information.
I'm sorry that I've gotten off topic from your question, I believe. The language of the bill is outside of my realm.