Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Blois, you kind of led into what I wanted to conclude with.
There are procedures in place, let's say, for farmers, processors and employees. They are audited on a regular basis by their commodity groups, CFIA, provincial health officials. There is a process in place to ensure they are following the rules and the strict biosecurity measures in place, and if they are not, there are already very strict rules, and penalties and consequences to that.
To Mr. Blois' question, that is an important differentiation that we have to make here. Those whistle-blowers would lawfully be on farm because they are likely to be family members, employees, visitors, who have been brought onto the farm, and that owner or farmer or processor has taken them through the biosecurity protocols.
Many of us have toured farms as part of our parliamentary duties or as constituents. I know that when I visit Cargill, for example, I go through a rigorous biosecurity process, or when I go to Mountainview Poultry, I do the same.
That is why there would be no repercussions to those whistle-blowers, because they are lawfully on farm as an employee and they would be following those strict rules.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.