Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for your testimony. I wouldn't say it clarifies matters any, because as we move through this day, the more the views presented are diametrically opposed. I think that fact alone justifies a decision by this Committee to continue its work with some additional sittings.
Mr. Chevrette, who is CEO of the Quebec Forest Industry Council, appeared earlier today. He described the agreement as imperfect, but added that the industry needs a shot in the arm. He said a considerable number of members had supported the agreement because they need liquidity. This dispute has hit them very hard. In addition to that, the Canadian dollar and energy costs are very high.
In your view, are there some parts of this agreement that need to be improved, even though it may be possible or impossible to do that in the coming weeks? Supposing the Committee recommends that Canadian and U.S. government representatives get together to make certain adjustments by means of letters of understanding; in that case, are there specific issues that you would like to see addressed? Or do you believe that the text of this agreement is perfect the way it is and requires no further change?
From what I've understood, two firms support the agreement. I would like to know whether they believe the agreement has been improved. If the third witness would like to add something, I would be happy to hear his comments as well.