Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We all heard about the U.S. offer and how enthused they were about how wonderful an offer it was, to reduce their domestic support. I'm still very skeptical about how sincere they were about that.
Has that offer changed? Did the Europeans match it? I sense that there's also a lot of holdback there. We're hearing of some manipulative programs in the United States, and I don't know if there is any fact to that. For example, in Montana, if you buy a new air drill you get a $40-an-acre environmental subsidy for reduced greenhouse gas emissions, soil conservation, moisture conservation. They don't call it a subsidy as far as their commitments to reducing their domestic support are concerned, but it gets rolled into an environmental subsidy. It's still a subsidy. That's rumour.
I don't know if it's fact--so Barry Wilson, be very careful if you quote me on that one--but we're hearing some pretty solid support that this is what's happening.
How do we combat those sorts of things when the Americans are saying they've put everything on the table, they're reducing their domestic support, it's going to be a wonderful thing for the rest of the WTO? How do we address those sorts of things, and has their offer changed?