Thank you for the question. There are many parts to this, so let me take them in order.
One thing I do want to make very clear, and the Auditor General will correct me if I don't have this right, is that this is not a health-of-people issue. This is an issue about pests, about potential risk to Canada's forests and crops, but we were not interpreting it, with all due respect, as a health issue.
Having said that, it is a very serious issue. I think you can see, from my opening remarks, from our discussion to date, and from the tablings of an action plan that I grant you is not yet complete but certainly offered as an indication of the commitment that we have to this, that we are determined to do something about it.
The DPR is a very important document for us. We are an agency that is based on risk management. In terms of plant health, we agree we need to do better. You point out that the Auditor General has given us indications in the past that there are issues that have to be dealt with. We agree. We have made some progress, and I would be the first to say not enough to deal with what the Auditor General has told us today.
On a risk management basis, we have been looking increasingly, for instance, at working with international standards, at sharing risk assessments with the United States, to try to increase our risk management approach. We know we need to do more.
In terms of the DPR, I do not have it in front of me, but I asked my folks for our results, our indicators, and I note that in terms of our own DPR we've indicated that we have met our targets only 50% of the time in 2007-08. When I challenged my folks as to what this means, I think in part it's reflective of the increased challenges we have. I think in part it's reflective of very high targets that this agency has set for plant health, recognizing the very important role the agency has, with other partners, in terms of plant health.