Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wilson, I thank you for having accepted this Committee's invitation.
You told us that the agreement negotiated by the government was the best possible in the circumstances. You also said that we should put partisanship aside and consider objectively what this agreement represents for our industry. However, as early as April 27th, after negotiating the framework agreement, the government kept telling us that negotiations were concluded. This is one of the reasons for our concerns about this agreement. We find it very difficult to understand why the government keeps saying that negotiations are concluded as soon as an agreement in principle has been signed.
On July 1st, when we received the legal documents, the Canadian industry that supported the framework agreement of April 27th, including the industry in Quebec, withdrew its support saying that it wouldn't give it back unless some changes were made to the agreement. The government has announced that it would not help the industry whatever decision they make. The industry has been put into an untenable situation. It has been told that the Canadian government would not negotiate further and that if it refused the framework agreement of April 27th, it wouldn't get any help. The industry was also told that it would have to go it alone before American courts and that the court process would probably take a very long time.
I have here a letter to that effect that was sent to the industry's representatives. Minister Emerson wrote that they must make a choice because the alternative is not the continuation of negotiations -- and I am asking you why -- but a return to legal challenges, a long and costly process whose result is always uncertain.
Even if negotiations have been concluded since April 27th, why has the government not been more open and not made sure that the agreement will better meet the needs and concerns of the industry? Why has it not been more open? Furthermore, why was it not possible to pursue the litigation before American courts considering the progress already made? The government could have committed itself to help the industry through loan guarantees.
As a matter of fact, I can see that the mechanism that is to be implemented is exactly what the Opposition parties -- which then included the Conservative Party -- had proposed. Export Development Canada will buy duties on the basis of contervailing duties, which are receivable accounts.
Mr. Wilson, why wasn't it possible to pursue the negotiations after April 27th? According to the government, it was take it or leave it or you would engage in a dead-end. Had you and Mr. Harper promised to the U.S. government and President Bush that Canada would only accept this agreement? Why is it not possible to continue negotiating since April 27th?