Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me first begin by thanking the witnesses for their testimony.
Obviously, all of us were quite concerned about the terrible bind Canada faced when the Buy American provisions and what they entailed came in. The protectionism that was happening in the U.S. was quite alarming to all of us. Given the fact that a lot of our businesses and manufacturers are in fact intertwined with their operations in the U.S., it made it extremely difficult for them to carry on their businesses.
So I realize the predicament the government was in. There was a lot of pressure to come up with an agreement. I think all of us felt that some type of agreement was necessary.
Since the agreement, there have been many of us who have had concerns about how the agreement came about, particularly on the issue of the blanket exemptions and what that means. Is that setting a type of precedent, a future precedent, for the country and our negotiations?
I'd like to hear a comment from any one of you, basically, on the blanket exemptions and the precedent-setting.
The issue of whether this also ties the hands of governments throughout the country when it comes to using public procurement to develop certain projects, to start developing economic development, and so forth is something that I think maybe some of you could help us shed some light on. Some of us are still asking questions here, and we're hoping to come to a conclusion. The concerns are out there that all of us have. Needless to say, we needed an agreement. The question we're asking is whether this is the right agreement.
It's open for anybody.