Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member on his address and the sincerity of his remarks.
I come back to his references to Article XI and the Liberal Party's defence of it. My question is really this. Would the member not acknowledge that this is a classic case of politicians, and in this case even the government because the government took a similar position, sending producers precisely the wrong signal at the wrong time?
What the market was saying to supply management people during the GATT negotiation was that this particular approach to protecting supply management was not going to last. The consumers would not pay the shot. Consumers were saying that in other ways in Canada by going across the border and buying supply managed products.
Would not the more responsible thing have been to say to supply management people: "Look, this system cannot be maintained the way it is now. It is going to have to be changed and we are going to have to find some other way to provide you with financial security", which is what we tried to do by making supply management people eligible for an expanded NISA.
In other words, does the party's and the government's experience with the article XI business not illustrate precisely that too much politics, too much government sends the wrong signals to producers and we would be better to withdraw politicians and government from any area where they can send those signals to producers and end up misleading them rather than leading them in the right direction?