Thank you to all witnesses coming before the committee.
Thanks particularly to you, Ms. Barlow.
You just received a very clear compliment, through Mr. Cannan's very rude tirade. He refused to give you an opportunity to reply, which I think shows that he's concerned, as are the Conservatives, about the real agenda getting out. What is very clear from testimony last Thursday and today is that this goes far beyond being an issue of smart borders, and that there's a whole variety of elements of public policy that are involved.
What I found most compelling about your testimony was the comment from the U.S. embassy that there was no appetite for a real public debate. Those are exactly the same words that were used by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives last Thursday. So they're using the same messaging, that there's no appetite, which I gather means they don't want the real agenda to get out in the public, and they are implicitly stating that they're concerned that Canadians would reject this agenda if they knew its extent. It's far beyond smart borders. It touches on energy sovereignty, water exports, and a whole variety of other issues including the protections that we take for granted as Canadians.
So I'm going to give you an opportunity to reply to Mr. Cannan, since he refused to allow you a rebuttal. I'd also like you to answer the question of why you think the Conservatives are so scared about this agenda getting out for public debate. If it was such a useful process, why are they scared of having that public debate, that public consultation, and parliamentary review of this very widespread and profound agenda?