My argument would be that I think those numbers are important to try to calculate. I know it's not easy, but when you are passing on substantial costs to an industry, I think the business case is there to ensure that you have the most accurate numbers you possibly can, especially if you are giving a rebate that doesn't come close to actually meeting their costs. You can't say that the carbon tax is revenue neutral.
I want to make sure that if the government is making that argument, they're close. We've heard from agriculture that the rebate is actually closer to 10% of their actual carbon tax costs. I won't belabour that, but if you do have the business case that the minister was talking about, I'd like to see that submitted to the committee.
My colleague, Mr. Calkins, mentioned it and we've seen some substantial loss in trade markets from canola, soybeans and wheat that is now, since 2015, depending on the commodity, a loss of revenue of $5.6 billion for Canadian agriculture.
Mr. Forbes, you and I have been on a couple of trips before, but there hasn't been a challenge on many of these things to the WTO. There hasn't been a strategy outlined. Why not? What's being done to try to regain access to some of these markets? I would argue that, for the most case, this isn't a quality issue. These are mistakes of government policy or government initiatives that need to be addressed.