I think the difference, sir, lies in the difference between being positive on trade and being positive on free trade agreements. I said in my testimony, as an economist I'm a strong supporter of trade when it adds to the net demand for Canadian-made products and the Canadians who build those products.
In Ford's case, they have taken a vehicle, and it's one of the exceptions to the rule, the Ford Edge, and they have designed it in a way, marketed it in a way, and invested in a distribution system and a transportation system to get those vehicles to other markets. They don't sell it in any significant quantity in Europe yet, but they do sell it in Latin America, Asia, and some other markets. That is a very positive thing. We need more of that. I was just answering Mr. Davies' question with some of the pragmatic ways we could support more offshore exports, none of which have to do with signing a free trade agreement and then just hoping for the best.
Tariff reduction alone is not driving any change in the structural imbalance in our automotive relationships with Korea, Japan, and Europe. With every one of those jurisdictions, our auto trade is a one-way street flowing in. I am positive about trade, I do think that stimulating more offshore exports is an important priority for a national auto policy. I think we will need some hands-on, more directive measures to make that happen, rather than just eliminating tariffs on both sides and hoping for the best.