But that category is treated differently from beans, and there's a reason why. I'm from Saskatchewan, where wheat, barley, lentils, and peas are all grown, but beans are not. I am curious whether this might change your view, because those crops we've listed—lentils, peas, wheat, barley, oats—are predominantly, to my understanding, imported by Colombia. Chile imports oats. The United States and Argentina import wheat, etc. But beans are treated differently because that crop is predominantly produced by the small producers.
My understanding is that they're keeping a 60% tariff, and that tariff will gradually go down over 20 years--Mr. Holder will probably know this better. But the crops that are not produced largely in Colombia will have their tariffs eliminated. I think that's a good idea, because it means that tariffs will be eliminated on crops that are not produced in Colombia, by and large--there are some exceptions and small things, but the crop that is most important to small producers is protected.
Do you not think that protecting that crop for small producers is good, whereas opening it up for the crop that is already internationally competitive is good for people who buy lentils, for the small bakers who buy wheat, etc? So is that not a good example of Canada and Colombia protecting the small producers but still expanding their trade?