I think you've got to separate these things. There is confusion between labour relations and this particular act. Labour relations at Toyota may vary from country to country and from place to place. Many of their plants are unionized. I don't believe Toyota sits down and makes a decision about where to invest on whether or not, if eventually they get a union, they can scab the place or not. I know of no experience around the world where they are unionized where they have scabbed them. I don't think it's a practical concern of Toyota one way or the other. That's my opinion.
On the second question, there is a bigger question here about whether we're going to race to the bottom to try to compete or whether we're going to try to raise our standards. There are many other countries in the world I'm sure you'd be interested in studying—outside of Ontario—like Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and the northern European countries. They have very high unionization rates, of course. They have legislation that says you can't bring in replacement workers. They are very productive. Their investment rate of capital is higher than that of the United States. People have a very high living standard. They don't have the poverty we have. Unions are partners in production, and they sit on the board of directors. Those are the things that are mature.
The other side of it is that replacement workers is really about class war. Really, when you get right down to it, it's that we're going to see who's going to win out here and who's going to lose. And that win-lose idea is really the problem you've got here without this kind of legislation to keep it balanced.