Mr. Chair, with that response, I can understand why the minister's name is mud in so many softwood communities from coast to coast to coast.
I'll go to my final set of questions.
Looking through the estimates again, there is nothing around public consultations on the SPP, the so-called security and prosperity partnership. I understand—and I will put this to the minister—that it is not because, as the Canadian Council of Chief Executives has said, the Canadian population is simply not ready for what is in the SPP. As well, there is nothing in the estimates that deals with the fact that under NAFTA and the Canada–U.S. Free Trade Agreement, two-thirds of Canadian families are earning less in real terms than they were in 1989, while the average level of household debt has doubled over that same period. So much for prosperity.
There's nothing in the estimates to reflect either the fact that the scant estimates that we've had of net job gains or net job losses under the Canada–Korea trade agreement have been discounted by many industrial sectors, including the auto industry. In fact, the only credible study shows a net loss of 33,000 jobs since Canada and Korea signed.
I'm wondering why there is no reflection of those three issues in the supplementary estimates.