I want to build on what you said about there being a wide variety of opinions. In a consultation process people are always going to look at things through their own lens.
I think Dave said it best earlier. We've had a chance to hear from a number of witnesses, a number of stakeholders. If you take a look at the transcripts, you will realize that every single person who came forward as a witness on this topic stated time and again that they felt they were not consulted. This is what my two colleagues, Madam Demers and Madam Gagnon, told us as well.
You've spoken today with a tremendous amount of passion. I really appreciate that, and I think all the other members do as well. I'm sure it's been an onerous process. But we as the health committee are trying to ensure that this is the best possible food guide. We want the food guide to be used by Canadians from different socio-economic and cultural backgrounds. We want it to have an impact on reducing obesity in the country.
Your version of the consultations is vastly different from the versions that other witnesses have given us. Some of the groups you spoke of, like Dr. Gideon from the AFN, were consulted. A few of the witnesses have said they were consulted, but they have all stated that they were consulted not on the substance part of it, not in terms of content, but on what the diagrams and pictures should look like. Yes, packaging is an important part of it, but these organizations are concerned about the substance, because they are catering to their particular demographic.
Could you clarify this for us?
Secondly, my colleague Ms. Davidson asked you whether this was a draft of the food guide. I'm a little confused, because in your presentation you said it was going up to the minister—there were a few things that needed tweaking, but it was a done deal. Based on what Madam Gagnon said, if we have recommendations, will they be incorporated in the final document?
Last but not least, can we as a health committee get a copy of the food guide in its draft form?