You realize why I'm raising that question, of course. The CAW has a good track record in terms of projecting economic impacts in a variety of areas, and I think it's important for the department to do the same exercise and bring forward what was projected and what the net results have been.
That brings me to the CAW report, because it does raise valid concerns. As Mr. Bains mentioned, there were 33,000 net jobs lost in Canada: in electronics, it was over 12,000; in machinery, 5,000; in transport equipment, over 4,000. There were more in metal products, plastics, and rubber. They've detailed the job losses across the country as well: 1,000 in British Columbia, 3,000 in the prairies, over 17,000 in Ontario, 8,000 in Quebec, 500 in Atlantic Canada, and then a number they weren't able to allocate. The problem, of course, is that we export to Korea essentially unfinished products, and as a result very little job creation comes with that, while the imports we would expect from Korea would be from the high-value-added manufacturing jobs.
I'd like to ask you what our top exports are now. Also, the scope of the CAW study and the wide variety of its sources, including the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association, have given credibility to potential job losses around this deal. Does that not make you want to go back and re-evaluate the impact studies that Industry Canada has done or to conduct your own impact studies?