Again, some provinces have different applications with respect to the agreement. That being said, it's somewhat ironic—and I'm not trying to take a shot at my friend Mr. Gorman—that the U.S. would prefer to deal with a trade agreement relaxing barriers and get that out of the way before it would deal with a trade barrier issue with Canada. It just doesn't make any sense. If the world is going towards freer access and freer markets for everybody with fewer barriers, then why the heck would we be signing a barrier when, theoretically, we already have free trade that imposes restrictions?
I think one of the speakers made the comment that recently we have enjoyed no tariffs. Lumber prices are, thankfully, doing reasonably well. I think they're a little bit softer than some thought they might be, but we're not very far from the thresholds that would in fact impose new barriers. With trade being the issue, somebody talked about currency and Russia. The U.S. is enacting new regulations for trade cases to go after countries that impose currency manipulations.
There are some, particularly those on the U.S. side, who would want restrictions and who would use Canada's dollar and what has happened to it to accuse Canada of currency manipulation.
Very clearly, the deal was not a good deal for Canada in the long term. It got us over a hurdle. It got us some certainty, which the industry liked. It also got the Americans $1 billion to play with. It also gave our major companies some money back, which many of them promptly invested in the U.S., which didn't do anything for Canada.
I'm very happy to see that the industry would be content if the deal just faded away. That's what should happen.