That's exactly the point I want to get to here, Mr. Casey.
I'm wondering if you could add some clarification, then. You are supportive of the wood industry, as am I. I come from an area that is a lumber-producing community.
What this bill presents to me is a threat to our international markets. Let's look at the specific wording of the bill. It calls for a preferential treatment for a specific type of building material. In the trade agreements...and you guys are experts on these. In the trade agreements, including the internal trade articles of 504(2) and 504(3)(b), including NAFTA agreements, including the WTO--all of these make it absolutely clear that any specific preferential treatment given by the Government of Canada is in contravention of these agreements.
We have a huge possibility to lose a huge market if this bill is passed as is. I am going to vote against this bill in defence of the lumber industry, in defence of the forest product industry that I represent.
I need to know--because we're here to hear about this specific bill, the wording of this bill--do you support a bill that in its wording would actually contravene our trade agreements, and the impacts that might flow out of that? You and I know very well that the United States is looking for any excuse to shut our border. Would you support a bill that would be seen as protectionist and would then limit our access to an international market?