Thank you for that.
Further to that, and in thanking our guests, I'd like to congratulate our officials on their strong negotiations to have our beef and cattle exports resume with Colombia. That's so huge for our farmers. That's so, so significant. Well done.
I'm compelled by your comment that Colombia imposed tariffs on some Canadian pork products as high as 108%--by the way, not 8% but 108%. That's why if there's ever a reason that this FTA must go through, it's even for that reason alone--but that's not enough.
In my experience, which is short-lived on this committee, I find that agriculture tends to be probably the most challenging issue at free trade agreements. Here, everything that I have read--and I read the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement--is exceptionally beneficial to Canada's agriculture sector. I can't understand, frankly, why any member of this House who has any regard for the agriculture industry would not support your efforts.
I'm not sure what we would say to our farmers in this country. Would we desert our farmers just because dealing with Colombia represents only $700 million in Canadian exports, which is less than 1%? If there's any argument for a free trade agreement, I sincerely believe it's because when we look at even NAFTA, 85% of our trade goes with them, but it's because we have a deal. There are some geographic benefits as well, but if we want to have an opportunity to increase our exports to other countries, it's as a result of having a trade deal such as the one you're negotiating.
I'm just trying to get my head around that. Is there something I'm missing here, that somehow if we don't have a free trade agreement we're going to do fewer exports?
Could you imagine--and perhaps this is to you, briefly, Ms. Nelder-Corvari--that this would do nothing but improve our numbers, our exports to Colombia?