Our situation is so different from the automobile industry, and frankly, we feel we're in a much better position because we have been doing our competitiveness homework. We haven't been asking the government to freeze the status quo. It would be easy to interpret what's happening in the automobile industry as that kind of request, but we just don't think that will work.
I think it's important to ask why we're here. We're here to find practical solutions to what we're really facing. So let's acknowledge what the government has done, which is excellent. Let's acknowledge what has to be done, which is to access credit. Mr. Chevrette and I and all of Canadian manufacturing and industry from coast to coast are very clear that credit is like oxygen. Even if you're a very competitive athlete, you're going to turn blue if you can't get credit.
Extending the mandate, scope, and funding for EDC is one thing the government announced that we loudly applauded. We're not asking for a guichet unique or une voie unique; we're only asking for the cash and loans. I fully understand Mr. Chevrette's frustration that even though it's all been announced, it's not flowing yet. I understand that you have to pass legislation and whatnot, but the question is not whether there is a guichet unique; the question is whether or not there are loans. If the government can deliver on what's been announced, and the mandate of EDC can be expanded in amount as well as scope so that more domestic-oriented loans supporting export-oriented industries can be made, that will give us a huge step up.
Beyond that survival is competitiveness. Certainly the money from marketing and research is excellent and necessary, but not sufficient. There are many other things that can be done. We've been asking for years that the money we invest in research become refundable. That would put cash in pockets right now and keep people working.
We've been asking for years that the Competition Bureau be more sympathetic to the restructuring of the industry. We've been asking for years that there be more assistance to the transformation of the industry--not just to green energy but to the lowest environmental footprint. That could be done softwood-safe and have social, environmental, and economic benefits.
One of the environmental groups suggested to me the other day that we go to the model that's used quite often, where money is paid for the transformation and the company pays it back through savings. It would be free for the government and it would really improve our competitiveness. If the money is paid back, it's trade-proof.
So I think the focus has to be on stuff that's been done. More stuff is planned and we're anxious to see it. What can be done, practically, in addition to what's been done? A lot of that has to do with industry transformation.