I agree with you that we should not go beyond what the current bill provides for the surveillance of travellers. I think that individuals have some responsibility. Perhaps they do not want to disclose the fact that they are suffering from a dangerous infectious disease. In many cases, they are aware of that fact, but they do not want to declare their disease. If this cannot be determined at boarding time, then all the passengers of the aircraft would have to undergo a diagnosis even before boarding, which is impossible. It would be extremely complicated to do this for ground transportation.
Why are the United States not asking for the same kind of protection? As Canadians travel South, the United States does not seem to be worried about certain infectious diseases. As you were saying, we are not talking about ordinary diseases. When passengers move between the United States and Canada, why do the United States not feel vulnerable?
Canada feels more threatened by a potential epidemic introduced by a traveller. As you said earlier, we do have some protective measures. Moreover, individuals are expected to declare such diseases. If someone does not comply, it is his responsibility. Basically, it would be very difficult, very expensive, and I think, practically impossible to apply measures that go any farther than the current measures.