Still today, we see them as a threat, because they give far too much power to companies.
There has been a good development. This mechanism has been excluded from the free trade agreement between Canada, the United States and Mexico. This means that free trade agreements can be entered into without the addition of these mechanisms. At the international level, these mechanisms are widely criticized. They give companies the opportunity to take legal action against governments with no reciprocity. As a result, the legal action is one‑sided and has a chilling effect. Given the existence of this process, companies can threaten governments with legal action and successfully change or limit draft regulations. We've seen it happen many times. For all these reasons, and given the utter uselessness of these mechanisms when it comes to preserving democracy, we maintain that they should always be excluded from all free trade agreements signed by Canada.
I spoke earlier about a similar agreement, the Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement between Canada and China. We protested strongly against this agreement. China has very little respect for rights. In a way, the agreement gave China a say over regulations. This agreement is non‑reciprocal. The Canadian government has very limited capacity to deal with China under this agreement. For all these reasons, it remains a serious problem.
Remember that many Quebec groups share our position. These groups include the Action citoyenne pour la justice fiscale, sociale et écologique and the Réseau québécois pour une mondialisation inclusive. We want this type of investor‑state dispute settlement removed from all agreements signed by Canada.