Thank you very much for that question.
There's been a very compelling presentation here this afternoon about areas where there are views that there's clearly room for improvement. We could talk about PBDEs, lead, PFOS, Goof Off, and each one of those is probably worthy of a little bit of exploration, but we should focus on the proposed solutions, which I think are quite helpful and a good starting point.
The Auditor General recently did a report with respect to how well the department was doing in enforcing some of the regulations and pieces of legislation the department is responsible for. The department has accepted those recommendations and has not disagreed with them. That, in many ways, speaks for itself. The tools are there. The department has struggled to enforce all the different components.
Lead is a particularly good example of the number of imported products and the need for inspection and enforcement, the difference between things being made in Canada versus being imported into Canada, and how you're able to stop all those at the border.
To be fair to Ms. Cooper and her presentation, there is also an issue of whether they belong in the product in the first place. What are the allowable uses? Again, that is something the department is looking at closely.
Labelling is a particularly challenging issue, and I would ask the committee to consider the balance there. The department recently introduced cosmetic labelling requirements. Those came into force in November. If you take a look at pesticide labelling, some of the pesticide labels are getting into small books, with the numbers of ingredients. So in some ways it's possible to lose the message, given the volume of information that ends up being required on the label. How to find that pertinent balance is always a particular challenge for the department. All of these things under the Hazardous Products Act are things that have been considered.
There have been debates about looking at that and including something like a general safety requirement, which would require manufacturers to know their product—how it's used, how it's disposed of, who they sell it to, how they sell it—so there isn't the potential to cause harm and create obligations in that regard. The department is constantly looking at how to try to improve the tool itself and is acknowledging that we have had some difficulties with respect to enforcement, as the AG pointed out.
Finally, with respect to the comment about recall under CEPA, some provisions exist today within CEPA if there is a regulation in place, if something is on the list of toxic substances, so there is a starting point within CEPA with respect to the recall powers currently available.
Do you want to add anything on recall?