No, but I would add to one of the points that Sari mentioned, and also to the last witnesses you had, around hazards in the workplace.
I'm from Atlantic Canada, and we have a lot of people working in dangerous work in that part of the country, as we do in many of our provinces. What often happens with a work refusal is that it is really a last resort by the worker. It is because they have made, perhaps, many attempts to already solve these hazard problems in their workplace, through their workplace committee, their occupational health and safety committee, or through other procedures.
To say that we're going to resolve all of these problems around hazards simply because the workplace parties are going to work better together I would suggest is not practically what happens in a lot of workplaces.
Secondly, the previous witnesses talked about the fact that we have 80 inspectors. We have over one million workers in federally regulated workplaces, I think, and 80 inspectors is not a big contingent of workplace safety inspectors to cover that number. As you can imagine, these workers are in thousands of workplaces across the country. Even to do one workplace visit by these inspectors would take many years to complete.
The fact that we have workers who would come forward with problems is incredibly important, I think, and we should be encouraging that and not discouraging it with this kind of legislative change.
Thank you.