I can start. It's a good question to ask how well we doing and how we measure up against the competition.
I don't have any metrics, but I can tell you what I'm hearing anecdotally from a lot of our members. I usually hear good words about the trade commissioner service. We have several members here today—they are not exceptions—who have used the trade commissioner service. The types of comments we hear from them, as I think Bruce said, are that it's probably one of the best-kept secrets. So I think sometimes the challenge is to get more companies to be aware of these services and to be able to use the trade commissioner service effectively.
The other comment I hear, which gets more to your point, is that we need people on the ground in foreign countries, especially now with the threats of cutbacks and things like that. I think there's a bit of a concern that our resources might be fewer and farther between in foreign countries. The comment I often hear from Canadian companies is, “We go to a certain place and we see the Americans having a very strong presence, we see the Chinese having a very strong presence, and we see a lot of European countries having a strong presence,” and that's not necessarily always the case for Canada, despite the fact that we carry a very strong brand. I think that's pretty explicit. So I think the we cannot stress enough the need to have more of these resources in foreign markets.
As to measuring the performance of our services, one of the things you might want to take a look at is the trade delegations that a lot of foreign countries have here in Ottawa, some of which operate a little bit differently than our own trade commissioner service.
Generally speaking, I think the level of satisfaction on the part of Canadian companies is quite high. There are obviously certain things that could be done to help improve the service.
I think it's important that they maintain the level of flexibility they've had historically, and not necessarily have all of their priorities dictated here in Ottawa, but be able to be flexible enough to meet the needs of businesses, depending on the market where you're doing business. I think Bruce's comment was quite clear in that regard, when he said everybody falls within clean tech. So focus on the results and on companies that are well-positioned to gain business in foreign markets.
I guess I'll end my comments here, but generally speaking, I think it's important to have boots on the ground.
But just to add to what Mr. Shah was saying, I think the needs of SMEs are specific. I think they were quite well explained by people here. And, yes, I think large companies might have more resources and sometimes have more people on the ground in these countries, but they still require very strong support from the trade commissioner service. To have an ambassador, to have a senior trade commissioner, there alongside a Canadian company in a lot of these foreign markets makes a difference, because all the other countries are doing it.
What I'm hearing from members is, “Sometimes we need our ambassador to make a phone call or just say a few words in support of our bid, or just be there alongside us when we're trying to get a specific contract or project off the ground, because all the other countries are doing it.”
I think that's why you've heard business communities in recent years sometimes complain about—or actually, not complain, but probably support—the government, Prime Minister Harper, Minister Fast, and other ministers spending more time travelling to these other markets, because that's what other countries are doing. To have them lead missions and business delegations to these foreign countries makes a huge difference in companies' ability to get business in these markets.