Thank you, Chair.
I have great regard for the new vice-chair from the party opposite, but I could never imagine a clause that I could so totally disagree with. The context is so ideological.
I just heard my friend opposite talk about and actually recognize the government's acknowledgement of labour and human rights and the environment, and then he put this kind of condition on the relationship.
I've never been aware of any trade agreement that had this kind of confining clause in it. Imagine that you've put something in place, and three years from now, you have the potential to rip it up. That is bizarre to me. I say this as a business guy. I couldn't imagine this kind of restriction, because it really puts into question, frankly, all that goes into an agreement. It is rather interesting. It takes so long for all of us to get any agreement in place. What a way to tie the hands of all.
Respectfully, I won't support the amendment, because it is antithetical to what we are trying to accomplish. Trade agreements, by their nature, are longer term in view. It's not like having a contract with a supplier that you're going to review in 24 months, or in this case, 36 months. This is longer term. It requires a longer view. The longer-term opportunities will be significant for both Jordan, I sincerely believe, and Canada—or why else would we do this?
Respectfully, to my friend opposite, I cannot support the amendment.