It's rather interesting and I appreciate our guests' testimony today. It will help round out some of the considerations as we go through this study.
As I've thought about it, it takes me back to our most recent meeting earlier this week. We had representatives who spoke against a closed shop. I think Mr. Aubin made a good point. We've heard a number of witnesses who were opposed to a closed shop. We've heard both sides, but there have been a number who have talked about the closed-shop scenario.
It seems to me that we're always talking about the financial piece, and I understand the financial piece. Surely, 27 individual firms—to use your number, Mr. Harris—is better than two, from a competitive perspective.
I was struck by what you said about the bill. The first word you used was “fair”. I asked this question last week, but I need both of your perspectives. We all have a responsibility to taxpayers at any level of government, and I would presume that we take that as one of the paramount considerations.
Assuming there was talent there, whether it was union or non-union.... I guess there are two questions. First, let me ask directly, are you non-union? Can I ask you that as a direct question? Are you against union labour?