Agriculture committee  Both.

Agriculture committee  No, not at the moment.

Agriculture committee  I don’t have these figures at the moment. We have year-to-year data from the CFIA. We provide input to them when they're establishing their compliance program, and they always report back to us. Indeed, a lot of that information is publicly available. They tell us of specific i

Agriculture committee  Again, the regulations for the own use import program are clear, in that the permits are for products imported and used in one growing season, one year, or whatever it is. If the label allowed for “after a killing frost”, we would allow it after a killing frost. Farmers are not t

Agriculture committee  As I've said, in our approving and import permit, we have done a review that says we have reason to believe the amount imported is actually what the farmer is going to use this growing season, that there is a match between volume and acreage to be treated. But even last year we r

Agriculture committee  The information we have now on container stewardship in Canada is that the voluntary recycling program, which is funded partly by industry and partly by the provinces, has a 70% return rate. In the early fall, at the time of our FPT meeting, which was in early October, at that po

Agriculture committee  Again, I don't know whether Richard has more details, but we did check with our people on whether this specific product would work after a killing frost and they said no. Not all glyphosates are the same. They have different formulas, different adjuvants, and different safeners.

Agriculture committee  First, let me go back to this fall's experience with the own use import program and permits. Let me reassure you that as regulators we don't want to be seen to be arbitrary. We actually looked at whether we are being too strict and too tight with respect to applying the rules. My

Agriculture committee  Yes. There are a few things we're doing about that. One is that our re-evaluation program now holds regular teleconferences, and anybody who's interested can participate. A number of grower groups have people participating. That is to get a better sense early of whether, if you

Agriculture committee  On the human safety side, our data requirements right now with the United States are harmonized. So in terms of what is the maximum information that the U.S. EPA would look at and what is the information we would look at, that's harmonized. On the environmental side, as I said,

Agriculture committee  The testing to register a product—and Dr. Bennett referred to the toxicological testing—is common around the world, so we don't add to the registrants' burden with the toxicological testing. That is consistent around the world. Our costs for bringing registration to us are not $1

Agriculture committee  They are harmonized with Europe, with the U.S., with Australia, with Japan. You're not going to get your product registered in any developed country unless you've done those basic tests.

Agriculture committee  The way I express it to registrants, to any user sector, to the health groups, and to the environmental groups is that we are trying to minimize the costs the Canadian regulatory system brings to bear on registrants. We are also trying to have incentives to get products registere

Agriculture committee  Yes.

Agriculture committee  If you bought the Canadian-registered product from the co-op down the road...there is nothing that says a farmer has to buy and use a Canadian-registered product in one year. Under the own use import program, the regulations are very clear, black and white: import and use in on