Again, I'm not here to interpret what CAHI is saying, but I think science has evolved. I think the processes that we have in the veterinary drugs directorate have also evolved.
I'd like to give you one example. In 20 years, we've never had the approval of a product at the first round where a manufacturer files a submission. It is always three or four years later that a letter goes out with deficiencies. This year, two drugs have been approved at the first cycle, so there has been a considerable improvement.
Some of the improvements are not in terms of looking at risk aversion and risk assessment but really being able to go out and get the expertise to help us in providing us with recommendations. One of the process improvements that we've implemented as we've moved forward is that when there are issues that are scientific in nature where there isn't the expertise within the veterinary drugs directorate, we've partnered with the CVMA, the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association, to identify experts in the field so that we can bring in a panel of expert advisers who will help us identify and address the issues that come in these submissions so that we can move forward.
I'm sure that's coming from the IFAH report, or part of it is coming from the IFAH report, but some of the processes we've put in place will help us move forward. Some of these strategies are really going to help us in bringing that balance between health and safety and being able to do those risk assessments. There's no sense in doing an assessment when you're not aware of what's happening practically in the outside world. So our interactions with CVMA, livestock producers, and industry are extremely important.