I think what is extremely important is that Canadian agriculture must win at the WTO. This is what it's about. It's about a win for Canadian agriculture; it's not about one sector versus another sector. When we look at the agriculture negotiations--and I was part of those deliberations before Canada set its initial negotiating position back in 1999--Canada came out with a very balanced position.
Their objective is clear, Mr. Chairman. The objective is to make sure we manage to maintain an effective supply management system in Canada and also to provide as much opportunity for our non-supply-management industries through the different avenues, through the negotiations.
When I look at the negotiations and I look at the export subsidies pillar, I see we have a clear win for our non-supply-management industries when we have an export deadline of 2013. When I look at the domestic support pillar in agriculture, I see again a clear win for our non-supply-management commodities. We have proposals on the table that are going to cut some of the high-spending countries such as the EU, the U.S., and Japan--again, a win for Canada's non-supply-management commodities.
And when I look at the third pillar in agriculture under market access, Canada has been very focused on a general reduction formula that has been very aggressively pursuing that to again allow our non-supply-management industries an opportunity for more market access around the world.
Mr. Chairman, for Canada to maintain its balance, it must focus solely on sensitive products for supply management because it is the only area we have left for those industries. If the government is successful in that area, it will have brought back a win-win for Canadian agriculture, a balance for supply management as well as for our non-supply-management farmers. And that, Mr. Chairman, is what this round has to be about: a win for Canadian agriculture.