Lana, I really appreciate that: Let's just get it done. That's the approach we took after World War II with many of our industries. We created hundreds of corporations here in Canada to make certain that our soldiers across the ocean had what they needed. Whether it was lumber, steel or iron, we were able to produce that. Canada, little tiny Canada with barely 30 million people, was able to produce the largest merchant navy in the world while also supplying our men and women overseas with every bit of raw material they needed, including material that was produced right here.
That is a far cry from where we are today with softwood lumber, but I don't think it's something that's beyond our reach. I think that Mr. Lee can have his products for his construction at the cheapest price possible, because we've supported groups like Mr. Nighbor's and his industry in producing value-added products. Hopefully we've done a good enough job as a country to ensure that we've created a foundation for forestry and softwood lumber where they can actually be seen as a competitive force not just domestically but internationally.
My colleague from the Bloc Québécois mentioned that one of the root causes of this trade dispute is related to this idea of a subsidy, that all of our Crown forests are this great big subsidy that has to be protected from American softwood lumber industries or their big lobby. Of course, I disagree with that. I do think that Americans need our lumber tremendously.
I think that in many ways this is Trump's way of trying to create a positive surplus for himself. It has nothing to do with the fact that he's failed to secure America at the borders. That's not our problem. It's his job to secure the American borders. What he wants to see is his industries benefit through the trade imbalance that currently exists. Canada has a surplus partly because of our great industries and how competitive we are, and we're being punished for that. That's inappropriate. That's not an okay thing to do. That's not what friends do to other friends.
This is why I agree with the team Canada approach. We do need to see that. It needs to put front and centre what is valuable for Canadians, which is our jobs, the union jobs that are there. That is the most valuable and important piece to this puzzle for me.
Ms. Payne, in terms of a team Canada approach, you just witnessed Justin Trudeau, our Prime Minister, head to the United States. He came back without the answers that we were hoping for, unfortunately. What do you think needs to be the question we pose to our Prime Minister at this point?