Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And thank you to our witnesses.
I'm pleased to represent Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, which is a real hub of energy-related manufacturing. Speaking of the definition of manufacturing, that's one of those other areas where people don't necessarily make the connection. There is the importance of our energy sector, but also the relationship to manufacturing.
I did appreciate the mention of pipelines as well. I would be remiss if I didn't mention, of course, that we could be building more pipelines here as well, which would support our steel industry. Just coming off the heels of a leadership campaign, I know that our new leader has an Evraz steel plant, which makes pipeline, right in his riding. That is an important part of our energy economy, but also supporting manufacturing and supporting the steel industry. Those are good unionized jobs at Evraz that are helping working families.
Having made that point, I want to ask Mr. Wilson about your comments around expanding and strengthening the agreement. There's a lot that sounds good there, but on the other hand, my impression is that the prism through which the American administration is seeing this is instinctively one of kind of wins and losses. It's one of trying to get a better deal for America relative to other countries.
That's not how I see international trade. I see it as an opportunity to create a space of free exchange where people can prosper together. Speaking of the real practicalities of this, is there a way of achieving a win-win not just economically but also politically, of kind of speaking into that prism of you're winning or you're losing in a way that, yes, allows the American administration to point to some results it's achieved in a way that is also advantageous or at least not disadvantageous to our interests?