Yes indeed.
Mr. Julian, when you talk about facts, let me just spend 30 seconds on that issue. It was your party that said that if we entered into the very first of the free trade agreements, which was the cornerstone of many to come, we would lose our jobs, our pensions. We would lose our water, and we would become hewers of wood and drawers of water.
What are the facts? In the last 10 years, Canada, the leading performer in the G-8, has the highest employment generation of the G-8, the highest increase in value exports to the U.S., and consistently higher surpluses in our trade and goods with the United States—vastly different from what you anticipated. In fact, the picture that you painted and the attempt to scare the hell out of people is so at odds with the reality that it's not even worthy, frankly, responding to.
But let me get back to the issue of Colombia. First of all, you mentioned Pinochet. Pinochet is gone. What about the Chile of post-Pinochet, Mr. Julian? Is it a supreme performer in South America? Have you been to Chile? Do you know what the fellow South Americans think of Chile? They regard Chile as the leading economy, and not only the leading economy, but in terms of the reform of its pension system, in terms of its social policy, the leader in South America. So much for post-Pinochet Chile.
The second thing I would say is on labour agreements. I'm in favour of labour agreements that have teeth. That's what I said to Mr. Bains at the outset of the questioning. If you say to me the fine is minuscule, I'm not interested in that kind of labour agreement.