Mr. Chairman, to Mr. Ouellet, I appreciate his intervention, but the motion itself talks about the new national community development trust, and I appreciate the recognition of it. And it also talks about providing funding—the amount was taken out—to diversify forest economies by the provinces, etc., and that's what we're talking about here, to mitigate the damage caused by the downturn in the forest economy as well as other manufacturing sectors. So when I refer to the community development trust, it's in the Bloc motion. So I am talking about the same thing, in fact.
I'll reiterate my distinct fear that we have to be very careful in any motion we put forward, any study we do, that the Americans do not see this as a start to a plan to directly subsidize our forest industry. I know Mr. Alghabra understands exactly what I'm talking about, because he knows the softwood lumber agreement very intimately. I know that Mr. Boshcoff and Mr. Tonks, Mr. St. Amand, Madame DeBellefeuille, and Mr. Ouellet all know that, as does Ms. Bell, being in a forest-dependent area of Vancouver Island. We know we cannot allow the Americans even to perceive this, because that will result in an immediate softwood lumber challenge.
So unless we can have a motion that deals with the industry in a way in which it cannot be perceived that the government is going to directly subsidize the industry, I can't support it, Mr. Chairman.
I really think the other members are very wise as well, and I think they understand the point I'm trying to make. I have all types of willingness and desire to deal with the forest industry and the problems we have, but with caution in that one respect.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.