Mr. Chairman, I'd like to point out, because there seems to be a bit of misinformation here, that the only alternative to this deal is continued litigation. We should all be very clear on that. The minister was extremely clear on it this morning.
I think quite rightly the companies you people represent are going to have to make a tough choice. They're going to have to look at this agreement and make that decision, because as has been pointed out by colleagues across the way quite rightly, the companies themselves, if they so choose, can scuttle this deal.
But let's be very clear, because the minister was clear this morning, that if this is no deal.... It's fine to sit here and theorize that maybe we can reopen negotiations and get a few of these things fixed that we don't want, but both sides have to be willing to come back to the table, ladies and gentlemen. I don't believe for a minute, if you look at the record, that the Americans are going to be coming back to the table in the near future. So what we have is this deal or continued litigation for any number of years into the future. That's what I would submit.
Furthermore, just so that we're very clear about the termination, because this keeps coming up over and over again, only the Government of Canada or the Government of the United States can terminate this agreement after the 23 months plus the one-year freeze on litigation and trade action. So I don't think we need to continually raise this, that somehow the U.S. industry is going to suddenly get nervous and trigger the cancellation. It's only the government that can do this, and I would submit it's highly unlikely that either will, certainly within the three years.