Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Stanford, you prepared a very detailed criticism of the study that came out from International Trade. I won't go into the details, but one of the aspects you touched upon in your presentation was the fact that there are constant returns to scale. So regardless of whether a factory's producing 200 or 200,000 vehicles a year, they just assume that there is the same level of cost competitiveness.
Your criticism is very detailed. The criticism of the CAW report that we heard from the minister and from International Trade officials was largely superficial. The language they used was very strong, but the only element they seemed to point to was the issue around computer and electronic products, that somehow, because they're tariff-free, the job losses estimated by the CAW study in that sector are not legitimate. That's what they pretend, anyhow.
I'd like you to explain those figures--12,556 net jobs lost--and also explain the estimates for the auto industry and auto parts. I believe they're contained within the transportation equipment manufacturing section, but I could be wrong. Please explain those figures as well.
If you have time, could you come back to any studies done by the CAW, or anyone you know of, of past comparisons of International Trade projections and the actual net results of our bilateral agreements?