Mr. MacInnis, you were bringing up some really good points about distribution and chasing down where it came from. I'm a little bit concerned, though, about the culpability and the responsibility of the retail supply chain we have and whether we're doing enough there.
I'll use the example of circuit breakers. And I'm not saying they have them, but let's say they're in a Wal-Mart. If a person walked in, bought that, and had a problem with it, shouldn't the retailer have some culpability there? I mean, this is a multinational conglomerate company that's making a lot of money, and for the safety of our own selves, I have a hard time believing we should just say, well, too bad, sorry I bought it. That might be the real situation, obviously, but there should be some checking.
What happens at the next stage? Is there follow-up to make sure they don't purchase from that supplier any more, or else, following that chain, to make sure the supplier identifies where they got it from and never purchases from there again?
I agree that there has to be greater commitment--it's obvious from the hearings we've had already--from government policies and supports in the field, but shouldn't there be some expectations on retailers? If you were in a food service industry, you couldn't serve rancid meat. You couldn't have practices that produced that type of atmosphere that would poison people without repercussions. Do we need to do more to the retailers and put expectations on them?
My concern is that the people who are playing by the rules, who are stocking their shelves with the proper things, are going to be penalized as well by this. They're actually going to have increased prices and lose customers. It becomes a race to the bottom if we don't have tough penalties on retailers.