What I would like to come back to are the economic fundamentals of the whole issue. I do not like any type of distortion built into any product market, whether or not the oil market or the potash market is distorted. As a free-market economist, I don't like that. I would prefer to have a level playing field across the board.
That may raise the suggestion that I'm somewhat naive in the real world, because our trade competitors are actively engaged in destructive practices and have been for a long time, but that's what these negotiations are about. Not just these negotiations, all trade negotiations are about trying to get free trade, which has never existed, but that's the objective, to eliminate these distortions and try to have a level playing field. If it turns out that the Australians have a fantastic advantage in terms of producing cheese, is there any reason why we cannot use our tremendous advantage, perhaps in higher education and R and D, and concentrate on those areas and trade those to the Australians and import cheese? We'll be better off.
I don't want to leave the impression that I am ignorant of a lot of the distortions that are out there in our trading environment. I'm just in favour of finding the way. That's why I said for me it's not about the free trade agreement, it's about what's good for Canadians.