Thank you.
Thank you to the witnesses. It's good to see all of you again.
Indulge me a bit, please. I'm going to come at this a bit from an obtuse direction. We've talked about reciprocity here. We've talked about keeping competitive. We are, from a certain perspective, still in a hypothetical state, but areas of the world are moving ahead with this. I've heard the concerns expressed around competitiveness, around the retaliatory potential trade implications. If areas of the world that we compete with or trade with have higher carbon intensity for the impacts of their own production that they're bringing into Canada or that we're competing with, what is the issue with Canada then—actually, the Canadian taxpayer—subsidizing our competitors with their imports into our own country?
Just think about this for a bit. That would reduce the retaliatory risks. It would lower the input costs to our own farmers if the Canadian taxpayer subsidized the import costs coming in. After all, Canada is only 1.5% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, and agriculture is only 10% of that amount. A lot of the world that we compete with is putting a lot more greenhouse gas emissions into the air than we are. The Canadian taxpayer actually addresses climate change by subsidizing imports that compete with our producers. What are your thoughts?
Believe me; I'll circle back.