I think the negative list approach reflects a higher degree of faith in the assumed efficiency and mutuality of a free trade agreement. If you start from the assumption, as is embodied in those economic simulation models, that free trade will naturally benefit both sides through the automatic workings of market forces, then the negative list approach would seem to make sense. Because if you believe that, then you want the treaty to cover as much ground as possible. I don't think that faith is justified, because the assumptions that go into that approach are not valid.
Let me emphasize clearly, I am absolutely in favour of trade. I view trade as crucial to Canada's prosperity and to the future success of the high-value industries I've been talking about. They cannot exist without trade. But in order to promote our trade I think we need to be more deliberate and strategic in identifying the areas of opening that will benefit Canadian-based companies and Canadian-based industries.