Thank you, Madam Chair.
Welcome to all my colleagues.
I also welcome my colleague Mr. Plamondon and thank him for introducing this bill, which will definitely solve some longstanding problems. Of course, nothing is perfect, and there's no magic solution, but it's preferable to have statutory provisions on the subject than not. I think that's obvious.
Before asking you my question, Mr. Plamondon, I want to correct a few points for the record.
First, the obligations under Bill C‑216 apply before any agreement implementing act is introduced. In other words, it will become part of the minister's mandate: the minister will be barred from making any commitments on Canada's behalf. Consequently, this is in no way an agreement implementing bill.
I'd also like to clarify another point in view of our colleague's previous remarks. Supply-managed sectors receive no production subsidies. That's also important to note.
Mr. Plamondon, I'd like to ask you a question that, in a way, is a kind of rhetorical question.
Some of our opponents tell us that the bill might undermine other sectors during negotiations. My impression is that everyone is a believer when it comes to supply management, but there aren't a lot of practitioners. We often hear elected representatives say they fully support supply management and that they're committed to keeping it intact but that we shouldn't deprive ourselves of certain opportunities in future negotiations. Ultimately, they say they'll keep supply management intact but want to have the option of opening up a breach.
Doesn't that argument alone indicate how necessary this bill is?