Notwithstanding that there is information sharing and providing of risk assessments, if I go back to the idea of the precautionary principle and apply it to pesticides and take a look at other jurisdictions, we have a situation here where not all citizens can avail themselves of the same value of the precautionary principle. That's a sad thing, which I hope Parliament will act on.
I have another question regarding how you work with partners. I'm referring to research, particularly with the universities. Presently, Bill C-2 is in front of committee; in fact, Mr. Poilievre is on the committee. With respect to how we look at access to information when it affects people's health and, in particular, new technologies, new products, is there a window for your respective departments if someone says “Look...”?
There was a case that came before me about Wiarton and some water technologies, where there were two schools of thought. How would CEPA perhaps involve itself if it were to hear concerns about new technologies or new products? Would they wait until they're invited in? If a researcher was working on a project, would they call the ministry and say they have concerns about the work that's being done and some outcomes that aren't being understood? Could they call and presumably someone would show up? How does that work just in terms of the regulation and the policing of it?