Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, guests, for your presentations.
Ms. George, you've stated the benefits to the companies your organization represents that employ Canadian workers. While it won't be a monster leap ahead financially, over the long term it will be beneficial. I appreciate your saying that.
Mr. Pomerleau, the benefits to the pork industry, although not a huge leap ahead, will open up some very good opportunities over the years.
I have to correct Mr. Cardin. I was here when Mr. Pellerin was here, and not once did I hear him say that the agreement wasn't worth the paper it was written on. As a matter of fact, as Mr. Holder pointed out, he said he would have seen some things go further, but overall it was something he could support and we should go ahead with it.
Mr. Yussuff, I think you contradicted yourself, and I have to bring this to your attention. You made the statement that the Peruvian people are quite knowledgeable and sophisticated in so many respects. I can't remember what the text of your statement was. But I have to remind you that these knowledgeable and sophisticated Peruvians democratically elected a government that in fact ran on free trade as part of their platform. So to say that this free trade deal they were democratically elected to negotiate is so flawed and unworkable contradicts your description of the Peruvian people. I assume you would say the government that was elected was knowledgeable and sophisticated as well.
You also made the statement that you shared with your brothers and sisters that it will not benefit workers in either countries. I don't know how you can make a statement like that when Ms. George and Mr. Pomerleau both talked about how it would benefit business, from the point of view of the Chamber of Commerce and pork producers in the country. I know that the labour movement and the socialists don't have much love for capitalists, but I doubt if you'll find any stripe-suited capitalists working at the pork producer locations in Canada. You'll find hardworking Canadians who believe in what they're doing, and they're doing a great job in this country. So I kind of think that statement is wrong about not benefiting workers.
I probably won't get time for a question here, but I take great offence to your use of the phrase “neo-liberal agreements”. I've seen this very free use of the word “neo” in many presentations by folks connected with your organization. I find it very offensive, because I believe it's purposely used to try to conjure up some nefarious right-wing plot, although in this case it's used with liberal. I've never known a neo-liberal in my life who was nefarious. You lost me as soon as I read that and I find it very offensive. I know it's not an accident that was put in. I want to tell you and your colleagues that continued use of that phrase, that application, will lose me every time. I suggest you be more careful with it.
The other thing is that the booklet you held up, in my recollection, has never shown up in my office. I suggest that if you have material, you might want to circulate it, rather than keeping it in house. Whether you navel-gaze at it or not I'm not sure, but....
I know I've used up my time. I wanted to get that off my chest. I hope you heard my points.
Thank you.