I want to start by saying that not agreeing with this particular private member's bill that's been put forward doesn't mean that one's not supportive of the farming industry or farmers. I think we see this happening a lot today in a lot of different discussions. If you don't agree with one thing, you're kind of blankly put into a category of being anti-farm or anti-farm family or anti-farmers. I'd like us to be able to have a discussion about what this bill is really trying to do and the title of the bill, and then look at whether it's accomplishing that.
I agree with Mr. MacGregor that if this is really about biosecurity and the protection of animals, then there's no reason this wouldn't apply to any person who enters the space. Presumably, whistle-blowers or employees or anyone else there will follow the biosecurity protocol. They work there. If they're aware of this legislation, they have an even greater incentive to do that. I don't think this will somehow stop whistle-blowers or in any way endanger employees.
Additionally, it has to be reported or investigated. As we heard before, the CFIA does not do regular investigations or regular inspections of these facilities. It would then mean that somebody in the building or in the place of work would have to report someone else and say what they're doing, and I'm not even sure to whom, at this point, because trespassing is provincial jurisdiction. Expanding this bill to include anyone who comes in is really much more in keeping with the title of the bill and the intent of the bill.
Additionally, I would say that we received a number of submissions over the last while to committee that have been put in the file. I'm not sure if Mr. Barlow has read them, but there are numerous references to this. It's not one witness or one person. In fact, the majority of the submissions that have been made have actually talked about the need to make this bill about protecting animals and about biosecurity. It is repeatedly mentioned in those submissions that most of the breaches happened due to farm workers and farmers, not animal activist groups.
I agree with what Mr. MacGregor is saying. Maybe there is another way of getting there, if this is not acceptable, but I do believe this should be broadened and be a true biosecurity measure as opposed to something that simply targets animal welfare activists. As well, if we're talking about biosecurity, include biosecurity in the actual language.