The real question in NAFTA or any other trade negotiation is not what trade liberalization gets you in terms of espoused benefits (e.g., better access to world markets), but what the other trading party is willing to give you in exchange for giving up supply management. Supply management has helped Canadian farmers and rural development (Yes, at a cost to the taxpayers).  It was there before free trade. Now if we want to put an end to it, any good negotiator must know what to demand in exchange for giving it up.  The author of the article has not spelled that out.  It's not enough to say that Canadian consumers will supposedly have access to cheaper milk or spend less protecting farmer income.  What will we get from our US counterpart?  That is what NAFTA and trade negotiations are about -- getting something in exchange for what you give up.  It can be as much as a politically-motivated exercise as an economically-driven one.