On this discussion, Mr. Chair, on Gerald's point, it is an extremely serious matter, Gerald, that Canada didn't register an objection to that text. It may be a negotiation, but there should have been an objection registered to the text, which clearly compromises our supply management system. That's why I think we on this side of the table find it hard to really have confidence in what the minister is now saying. There was an opportunity for the Government of Canada to object to the text, and it didn't do it. That text clearly compromises the supply management system.
My question is maybe not so much on supply management, Stewart—I know you're a grain producer, as well. One of the difficulties that I think we all have, in fairness to the government, is that the farm community is really split. You have one part of the farm community saying, oh my golly, we need this WTO agreement; we're going to be practically saying we'll be millionaires forever. Your charts certainly don't show that the open market goes that way. Then you have the supply management industry, which clearly has the evidence on our side, but some are saying it has to be compromised to get to a bottom line agreement.
The Wheat Board is basically saying that the current text allows for a tariff reduction. The tariff reduction applies to bound tariffs, which are ceilings or limits and not applied rates. Therefore the change does not appreciably reduce the applied rates faced by grains, and on top of that. So the gains that are perceived to be there in terms of our exporting are not there. As well, the United States and other countries seem to protect themselves by protecting the fact that they can use export credits and food aid as exceptions. We're not allowing that.
What's your comment on that?