International Trade Committee on March 9th, 2023

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 52 of the Standing Committee on International Trade.

Today’s meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House Order of June 23, 2022. Therefore, members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application. I'd like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and members.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly. If you are participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mike, and please mute yourself when you are not speaking. With regard to interpretation, those on Zoom have the choice at the bottom of their screen of “floor”, “English” or “French”. Those in the room can use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

I remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair. Members in the room who wish to speak can raise their hand. Members on Zoom can use the “raise hand” function. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order as best we can, and we appreciate your patience and understanding in this regard.

Please also note that, during the meeting, it is not permitted to take pictures in the room or screenshots on Zoom.

In accordance with the committee’s routine motion concerning technical tests for witnesses, I am informing the committee that all witnesses have completed the required tests.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, February 8, 2023, the committee is resuming its study of Bill C-282, an act to amend the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act, regarding supply management.

We have a number of witnesses with us today: Daniel Turp, emeritus professor, Université de Montréal, as an individual; Dan Darling, president, and Greg Northey, vice-president, Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance; Nathan Phinney, president, and Dennis Laycraft, executive vice-president, Canadian Cattle Association; Pierre Lampron, president, and David Wiens, vice-president, Dairy Farmers of Canada; Daniel Gobeil, president, Les Producteurs de lait du Québec, by video conference; and Jan Slomp, National Farmers Union, by video conference.

Welcome, all. We're going to start with opening remarks, and then proceed with the first round of questions.

Mr. Turp, I invite you to make an opening statement of up to five minutes.

That will be followed by Mr. Darling, Mr. Phinney, Mr. Lampron, Mr. Wiens, Mr. Gobeil and Mr. Slomp, all for five minutes. If you can't keep track of that, I'm happy to reorient you as to who is speaking next.

Mr. Turp, I invite you to go forward.

[Daniel Turp, Emeritus Professor, Université de Montréal, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Greetings to your fellow parliamentarians and to the clerk of the Standing Committee on International Trade.

I would like to express my pleasure at being back in the House of Commons, virtually. Like you, I have had the privilege of sitting in the House of Commons, as I was the member for Beauharnois-Salaberry during the 36th Parliament, from 1997 to 2000. Today, I am responding to your invitation to appear before you to present my comments on Bill C‑282.

It is a very simple bill. As you've seen, there's a section that would add subsection 2.1 to section 10 of the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act. This subsection would essentially ensure that the Minister of Foreign Affairs could no longer engage in negotiations on Canada's supply management system or challenge it through negotiations.

I will make three points. A few hours ago, I submitted a written document to the clerk of the committee. I hope that you will be able to read this document.

My first comment concerns the advisability of improving the act by passing Bill C‑282. In this regard, you will note that I have mentioned in my paper and in my notes the existence of a broad consensus on the need to protect supply management. This consensus is reflected in unanimous House of Commons motions, including the one of November 22, 2005, which was adopted almost 20 years ago in the context of negotiations at the World Trade Organization. In 2018, there were similar motions in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations.

There are also statements from the Minister of Agriculture and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who reminded us that Canada's supply-managed sectors are pillars of rural areas. He added that his government had made a public commitment not to make further concessions in future trade agreements. The Conservatives, through their current leader, have also said that they support supply management. The New Democratic Party also did so in the discussions surrounding Bill C‑216, which preceded Bill C‑282, but was the same in content. The only party that is opposed to protecting the supply management system is the People's Party of Canada, and it has no members in the House of Commons.

So I say, very humbly, that there is a very broad consensus on this issue. Given that broad consensus, I believe that Bill C‑282 should pass and that Parliament should tell the government that it can no longer question the supply management system during negotiations.

This would also send a clear message to trading partners that they can no longer expect the government to make concessions on this system, and it would protect a number of farmers who are calling for the protection of this system and its continuation.

With respect to the legality of the bill, as I mentioned in my written notes, I agree with my colleague from Laval University, Patrick Taillon, who presented his views to this committee when Bill C‑216 was reviewed. I understand that you have a brief from him in which he comments on this issue. He says very clearly that this amendment to the act would be legal and would not pose a constitutional problem. In effect, a law could change the royal prerogative and limit the powers of the Minister of Foreign Affairs when negotiating international trade treaties that could allow concessions where there should not be any.

I will close, Mr. Chair, by suggesting that Parliament should play a much greater role when it comes to international treaties.

It should be given the ability to limit the powers of the minister, as the member who introduced this bill would like. Parliament should be able to approve international trade treaties, because they are important.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Monsieur Turp, you are over your time. If you want to quickly finish your thought, I can give you a couple of seconds.

[Daniel Turp]

I will therefore conclude my remarks, Mr. Chair.

I would remind you that the Quebec National Assembly can approve treaties relating to international trade.

I thank you for your attention and I am prepared to answer your questions.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Mr. Darling, please proceed. I am going to give everyone a one-minute finger, while you're looking, so you know when you might want to try to wrap things up.

Mr. Darling, go ahead.

[Dan Darling, President, Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to present to you today. My name is Dan Darling, and I am the president of the Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance. I'm also a beef producer and grain farmer here in Ontario.

CAFTA is the voice of Canadian agri-food exporters, advocating for a more open and fair international trading environment for agriculture and agri-food. Today, I am here to convey to parliamentarians in the strongest terms possible that Bill C-282 should not be supported, given its negative consequences for the Canadian economy and our hard-won reputation as one of the great trading nations of the world.

This position is grounded in decades of Canada's experience in leading the way in negotiating various trade agreements whether multilaterally, regionally or bilaterally. We represent 90% of farmers who depend on trade as well as producers, food processors and agri-food exporters who want to grow the economy through better access to foreign markets.

Our members include producers of beef, pork, grain, cereals, oilseeds, pulses, soybeans and canola as well as the sugar and processed-food industries. Collectively we account for over 90% of Canada's agri-food exports and support about one million jobs in urban and rural communities across Canada. A significant portion of these sales and jobs would not exist without competitive access to the world market.

Free and open trade is essential to our prosperity. Canada is a trade-dependent country. International trade accounts for nearly two-thirds of our national economy and supports more than one out of every six jobs.

Bill C-282 threatens Canada's ability to secure and negotiate the best trade agreements to support our long-term economic success. The committee has been told that Bill C-282 will not affect Canada's major trade deals because they are essentially all complete. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are negotiating a massive deal with the United Kingdom, our largest trading partner in Europe right now. Agricultural negotiations at the WTO remain ongoing, and provisions to CUSMA state explicitly that it can be reopened and renegotiated at a moment's notice.

My point is that this is no time to be making it more difficult for our negotiators to do their jobs. Flexibility and balance are key components to successful trade negotiations, and this bill takes away these critical ingredients.

Canada has successfully concluded many of its most beneficial and meaningful trade negotiations, including CETA, CPTPP and CUSMA, through compromise and flexibility. Simply put, these trade negotiations would not have happened if Canada was not prepared to discuss everything at the table with a broader national economic interest in mind. This legislation weakens our negotiation position from the outset and increases the leverage of other trading nations against Canada by making it impossible for partners to even contemplate a win, big or small, in these sectors.

Bill C-282 reduces our opportunity to participate and gain market access in various bilateral and multilateral negotiations. Ultimately, this bill will put us on a collision course with the United States and other major trading partners, especially when it's time to renew, extend or modernize existing trade agreements. Trade disruptions would be catastrophic for Canada. The food manufacturing sector is bigger than the automotive and aerospace sectors combined.

Further Bill C-282 sets a new dangerous precedent, inviting our trading partners to adopt similar legislation and closing market opportunities for everyone involved. Canada has worked tirelessly to promote open and rules-based trade for agri-food and bilateral discussions, as well as through the Ottawa Group and international organizations such as the G7, G20, the WTO and the forum for Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation. This legislation directly contradicts Canada's leadership at international fora like the WTO, where Canada opposes protectionism and supports rules-based trade systems.

A key part of Canada's economic growth will be trade diversification into other regions of the world where we don't have major trade agreements, such the Indo-Pacific and Africa. While the government's Indo-Pacific strategy is a step forward in trade diversification, Bill C-282 is a step backwards.

To summarize, Bill C-282 threatens existing and future trade deals, erodes stability and predictability in trade, and jeopardizes the very foundation of Canada's economic growth: free and open trade.

Make no mistake. Agriculture will not be the only industry affected by this bill. Key sectors such as energy, manufacturing—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Mr. Darling, I gave you an extra 25 or 30 seconds, but I'm going to have to move on now.

Mr. Phinney, please go ahead with your five minutes.

[Nathan Phinney, President, Canadian Cattle Association]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon. My name is Nathan Phinney. I'm a beef farmer from New Brunswick and president of the Canadian Cattle Association. With me today is Dennis Laycraft, executive vice-president of CCA.

We appreciate the opportunity from the committee to provide input on Bill C-282 from the perspective of the Canadian beef industry. Specifically, we will address our concerns regarding the detrimental and unprecedented nature the bill presents for future trade negotiations.

CCA represents nearly 60,000 beef producers from coast to coast. The beef industry is a significant driver of our economy, as Canada's second-largest single source of farm income, contributing $21.8 billion to our country's gross domestic product and supporting nearly 350,000 full-time equivalent jobs.

We, Canadian beef producers, pride ourselves on creating a high-quality, nutritious and sustainable protein that is less than half of the world's greenhouse gas emissions intensity per pound of beef. Simply put, we are producing food, benefiting the economy and at the same time protecting and conserving environments across Canada.

Free and open trade is key to the beef industry's success in Canada, with 50% of Canadian beef being exported around the globe. In being in an export industry, CCA has always emphasized the need for strong trade rules and principles in facilitating global trade.

Today we will outline some important considerations both specific to Canada's beef producers and the broad interests of the Canadian economy. We encourage the committee and all parliamentarians to consider these comments before moving forward with this bill unamended.

Increased market access has been essential to our sustainability as an industry. Beef producers earn approximately an additional $1,500 per animal because of our ability to sell on international markets. For our industry to continue to grow and diversify our exports, we will need the improved market access that comes through trade negotiations.

Closing future market opportunities is closing our economic growth as an industry. Allow us to demonstrate how impactful trade negotiations have become for economic success in an export-driven sector.

First, since the start of the CPTPP in 2017 and the removal of tariffs that followed, Canada's beef exports increased 192% to Japan. In 2022 we exported $500 million to Japan in beef and beef products. Additionally, when NAFTA was adopted, the Canadian beef industry saw an increase in value of exports of 650% from 1994-2022. Without these high-value agreements, we would not be exporting $6 billion a year.

If Bill C-282 moves forward, Canada will be at a disadvantage before negotiations even begin. Bill C-282 will tie the hands of our trade negotiators and severely constrain the Government of Canada's ability to negotiate and renegotiate the best deals for all of Canada. We understand, from previous trade officials' testimony under the bill's previous iteration as Bill C-216, that their ability to negotiate would be limited and that our trading partners would also limit their offers to Canada.

Canada's most beneficial and progressive trade deals, like CPTPP and CUSMA, have been achieved through flexibility and compromise. Our negotiators have balanced the need for ambitious outcomes while protecting Canada's interests. Bill C-282 takes away this needed flexibility to secure ambitious trade deals. In an already tense trading environment with protectionism on the rise, it is counterintuitive for Canada to add more barriers to trade. Bill C-282 sets a dangerous precedent that certain industries and sectors would have their trade interests protected through legislation. Further, this bill could see a domino effect around the globe for further protectionist actions from our trading partners. This risk is not worth the economic impact to Canada's economic sector, which relies on trade, and the broader interests of Canadians.

Market access losses will be counterproductive to Canada's wider economic interests. While many other countries have trade-sensitive sectors, we understand that no other country has chosen to legislate the work of trade negotiators. Bill C-282 is unprecedented in terms of global trade principles. Trade is essential for Canada and the world's food security. Closing ourselves to future trade is closing access to food for Canadians and the countries that depend on food exports.

Open and free trade allows access to food at lower costs. Canadian cattle producers provide some of the most sustainable beef to the world at a time when we're globally discussing climate change, sustainability and food security. The world needs more beef from Canada, not less.

To conclude, I want to emphasize that the growth of the Canadian beef industry will depend on international trade. Hindering trade is hindering our ability, as an industry, to grow. We strongly encourage members of Parliament to oppose Bill C-282 as currently written in order to allow Canada to preserve its robust ability to negotiate comprehensive trade agreements that help secure Canada's long-term economic success with the national interests of Canadian consumers in mind.

CCA appreciates the opportunity to provide input on Bill C-282 and would be pleased to provide any further information that the committee may seek.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Thank you very much.

Monsieur Lampron and Mr. Wiens, please go ahead. You have five minutes. I will give you the one-minute warning as well.

[Pierre Lampron, President, Dairy Farmers of Canada]

Mr. Chair and honourable committee members, thank you for the invitation to address the committee today.

My name is Pierre Lampron. In addition to being a dairy farmer myself, I am the president of Dairy Farmers of Canada.

Joining me for this presentation is our vice-president, Mr. David Wiens. We welcome this opportunity to express the strong support of Canada's 10,000 dairy farmers for Bill C‑282.

If passed, this legislation will ensure that supply management will no longer be on the table in current or future trade negotiations, thereby strengthening the Canadian dairy sector. It will give us greater predictability and stability to invest and plan for the future. It will also allow us to continue to play the vital role we need to play for the benefit of Canadian families.

The past few years have been challenging for all Canadians. In addition to a global pandemic and the resulting high inflation, there was the war in Ukraine and unreliable global supply chains because they were weakened.

Dairy farmers have also faced these significant challenges and have done their utmost to adapt. However, we have also faced an additional challenge: the impact of market access concessions granted under three successive trade agreements: the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, or CETA, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, or CPTPP, and the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, or CUSMA.

Dairy farmers in Canada estimate that the combined market access afforded by these agreements equates to an average annual loss of revenue of $450 million for dairy farmers.

I will now turn the floor over to Mr. Wiens.

[David Wiens, Vice-President, Dairy Farmers of Canada]

Thank you.

I'd like to point out that Bill C-282 comes at an inflection point for the country. Since the pandemic, Canadians have come to understand in very concrete terms what it means to be vulnerable to unreliable foreign suppliers. Canada's unique system of supply management was designed to put the needs of Canadians first. It ensures that Canadian families have secure and stable access to dairy, eggs and poultry products. For dairy farmers, it also means producing nutritious, sustainably produced, high-quality milk under some of the world's most stringent standards and practices for food safety and animal care.

This unique Canadian framework is weakened any time that dairy, poultry and egg market access concessions are negotiated and granted as part of international trade agreements. This results in replacing Canadian-made products with imported products on our store shelves. It significantly impacts our producers' ability to plan and make needed investments for the future of their farms, such as for our commitment to reaching net-zero emissions on Canadian dairy farms by 2050.

[Pierre Lampron]

Dairy farmers recognize that some sectors are highly dependent on the export market, but Canadian trade policy must also ensure that the needs of all sectors are balanced.

A truly Canadian model must ensure the success and long-term viability of all sectors, without pitting some sectors against others.

The compensation for dairy farmers and the investments in dairy processing announced in the 2022 fall economic statement will help our sector make the transition that will be required as these agreements are implemented.

Granting repeated market access concessions, followed each time by compensation, is not a model that will support the long-term success of our industry, nor would it work in any other sector of the Canadian economy.

Canada's dairy, poultry and egg producers have paid their dues.

Bill C‑282 would protect the sustainability and viability of Canadian farms under supply management by preventing the granting of further market access concessions under current or future trade agreements.

Parliamentarians sent a very strong signal in the second reading vote. They can send an even stronger message by quickly passing the bill and putting dairy protection into law.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Thank you very much.

So far, you win best in class.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

You were exactly five minutes.

Monsieur Gobeil, please proceed with your opening statement of five minutes.

[Daniel Gobeil, President, Les Producteurs de lait du Québec]

Good afternoon, members of the committee.

My name is Daniel Gobeil, president of the Producteurs de lait du Québec and a dairy farmer in La Baie, Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean.

It is clear to me and to the 4,500 dairy producers in Quebec, spread over 14 beautiful regions, that the adoption of Bill C‑282 is essential to the survival and predictability of dairy farms in Quebec and in Canada.

My predecessors talked about concessions. They mentioned these various agreements: the CETA, the CPTPP and the CUSMA. These agreements include concessions that have resulted in a market loss of 8.4%. In addition to this figure, there are tariff quotas already imposed by the World Trade Organization, the WTO. Today, 18% of the Canadian market is occupied by products supplied by other countries.

The supply management model dates back to 1971. It is not a business model, it is an agricultural policy that Canada has maintained over the years. All countries have agricultural policies and more fragile sectors, which they want to protect when they sit at the negotiating table. The European Union's Common Agricultural Policy, or CAP, is one example. The large subsidies associated with the U.S. Farm Bill are another.

During negotiations, each sector works to protect certain policies. In our case, however, it is always the same thing at every negotiation: the dairy sector is sacrificed at the last minute. It is very important to protect the supply management sector, i.e., milk, eggs and poultry produced throughout Canada. Supply management ensures profitability and balance on the farm, while meeting Canadian demand.

This model allows Canadian producers to offer a quality product that fills grocery store shelves. We have seen this in recent events following the pandemic and supply chain breakdowns. It is very important that our food and our health are supported by quality local products. It is important to protect those sectors that want to provide those products to Canadians.

By protecting the supply management system, Canada has, over the years, been able to negotiate trade agreements with many countries. In terms of trade, we have access to over two thirds of the world's population. It is not the supply management sector that has been detrimental to these agreements.

We hear comments from some players. We sincerely believe that it is possible to protect interesting market sectors and production methods such as supply management in Canada, while developing export markets for certain products for which there is a global demand. As we have proven in previous agreements, in Canada, we are able to do this.

We are really counting on the support of all political parties for Bill C‑282. That is what we have seen. The last few weeks have shown us that there is real support from all four major parties, and especially from their leaders, to protect jobs across Canada.

I thank you for listening and for giving me the opportunity to speak to you. I am available to answer your questions.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

That was under time, so that's now best in class.

Mr. Slomp, I invite you to make your opening statement of up to five minutes.

[Jan Slomp, Farmer, National Farmers Union]

Thank you.

I speak in support of the bill.

I am originally from the Netherlands as a dairy farmer. I have been living in Canada for the last 35 years as a dairy farmer and beef producer.

It is timely to have a bill like this. We are now in three or four decades of international policies focusing on trade agreements. Those were important years and probably important agreements, but in the meantime, our system has deteriorated. We are now losing 18% of our domestic market, as we heard the previous speaker say.

It is time that we have a close look at that again. I believe the circumstances have changed. There are fallacies that have come into this notion that free trade is good for all of us.

If we look at CETA, we find new concessions for the importation of cheese. Canada has lived up to that commitment in full. In exchange for that, we had further access for beef and pork into Europe.

If we look at the actual numbers, they are not panning out very well. We do export to Europe, but even at the time of the agreement, there was way more room to export in the agreement, but we've never filled it. With our rapid commitment to allow European cheese into Canada, we have not seen any step-up of this increased importation of Canadian pork or beef by Europe.

We need to be less eager to sign trade agreements with partners if they are not eager to live up to them. I think Canada is a boy scout when it comes to positive attitudes toward more trade, but we need to be critical of that. Like I said, circumstances have changed.

I have many friends in Europe who are dairy producers. They do reasonably well. They are not aware of how much cheese comes into Canada from their production, because the European policy-makers are protecting their industry in other ways. It's time we realize that in Canada.

It is the same with friends in the U.S. who produce milk. They have mailbox cheques coming in to support their bottom line, which we don't have in Canada. We don't need them as long as we are committed to our system.

Like I said, the circumstances have changed. We now have supply problems in the economy. It looks like they are here to stay, at least for the foreseeable future. What aggravates it further is unpredictable weather with more erratic extremes. I'd like to point out what was happening in the Lower Mainland a year and a half ago. We had an atmospheric river coming from the Pacific Ocean, bringing us extraordinary amounts of water.

In the last four decades, the Lower Mainland has attracted more and more B.C. dairy and chicken quotas. There is a heavily concentrated production taking place in that area, yet this inundation of water and complete elimination of functioning farms did not disrupt supplies of products out of the supply-managed sector. It was the organization, provincial and interprovincial, that was foremost responsible for that steady supply to consumers.

We also have demographic issues. The average age of a farmer in Canada is very high, yet in supply management there is a way healthier situation. This is because of our commitment to long-term sustainability in the system.

I'd like to point out the possible greedflation that is taking place in the grocery sector. The best answer is a regulated system in which prices are transparent and visible.

I'd like to come to the conclusion here that we cannot allow further deterioration of the system. We need to strengthen it, and it doesn't have to be at the expense of other commodities that need more trade.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Thank you very much.

We will begin our rounds of questioning now.

Mr. Martel, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank all the witnesses for being here today. Their testimony is very interesting.

The committee realizes that some of them are against the bill while others are in favour of it. We will certainly know more about this issue.

My first question is for Mr. Lampron.

If there were no supply management, what would be the consequences for rural Canada?

[Pierre Lampron]

It would certainly have a very significant impact.

The agricultural model that we have designed in terms of supply management ensures that everyone shares the income, as well as the expenses. So smaller farms can survive in the regions, because everybody has the same income. So this model is now applied to many farms, which may be a little smaller, but are still very efficient.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

My next question is for Mr. Gobeil, whom I know very well. He comes from my riding, a rural riding.

We always say that supply management promotes the vitality of small municipalities, particularly in rural areas.

Mr. Gobeil, what is the relevance of supply management in the Canadian economy?

[Daniel Gobeil]

Thank you very much for your question, Mr. Martel.

When we talk about collective marketing, it doesn't matter whether the producers are in L'Anse-Saint-Jean, Quebec, or in the north of western Canada, the prices are the same throughout Canada for the work done. This provides a fair price for an efficient producer. In fact, this last element is one of the principles of the Canadian Dairy Commission Act. This can be seen by looking at the increases in recent years.

In spite of this, farms across Canada have ceased operations. However, productivity has been maintained everywhere, resulting in an agricultural model.

In Quebec and Canada, we have chosen a family farm model to support our families and our communities. This small-scale production model is very well suited to consumers, and to your constituents as well, and allows us to provide a decent income for farm families in Quebec and Canada.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

I'm going to ask you one last question.

Without supply management, what would the situation be? Would there be farms in jeopardy? Would prices keep rising?

[Daniel Gobeil]

I don't want to be too alarmist, but we know that 10% of the world's milk production is exported. Canada and Quebec also participate.

We produce less milk than the state of Wisconsin, and I can tell you that, without supply management, dairy producers in Canada and Quebec who are far from the major markets and large urban centres would see their farm gate price drop considerably because of the long transportation distances.

This would lead to farm consolidation and bring us closer to the American model, where there are 10,000 to 15,000 cows on a single farm. In a region like yours, in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, there would be only one farm, and it would be that size.

It is clear that this would have a very significant impact. The latest agreements have shown that you can protect a certain agricultural policy, while at the same time entering into contracts and agreements that allow other sectors to export their products.