I can take a first stab at that, Mr. Masse, and then maybe Shane will jump in.
It's a bit of an open-ended question. There's a long history to the Auto Pact. To some extent, right now we're dealing with the product of that decision we made in 1965 to build an integrated North American industry. I guess that works insofar as the bigger trading partner of the two is well aligned with principled approaches to the free movement of goods between borders, but the minute they want to close down, it changes the calculus.
Really important pieces of the Auto Pact were the individual covenants that were struck between each of the OEMs, the automakers, to commit them to value-added production in Canada and so forth. Of course, all of that managed trade approach died away under NAFTA and then was firmly destroyed under the WTO.
So we're swimming in murky waters. Again, it kind of gets masked when the U.S. is willing to play ball, but when they don't want to anymore, we have a bit of a rethink about how we approach trade. I won't get into a long diatribe on this, but we talk about industrial policy and we talk about the situation we're faced with now. If trade policy isn't factored into that larger conversation of a suite of things we have to consider about how we move forward effectively, I think we're missing a key piece of this.
I don't know if Shane wants to supplement that.