That is important to know, because if our colleagues in the governing party agree to our motion, we will be able to ask the right people these questions.
I'd like some more information about how mutual recognition works. If I understand correctly, we don't make other standards here in Canada. If another country's standards are not similar, we don't aim for similarity in the standards. We want standards that have the same objective when it comes to mutual recognition in a given sector.
Do you rely on the objective of a standard or are you more concerned with the details of regulation? In other words, if European standards are really different from Canadian standards in terms of the details, could there be mutual recognition or would you be picky and ensure that the standards are more harmonized? I think that harmonization is not what we should be aiming for. We should be aiming for mutual recognition.
Do you have the same logic on this? We often talk about mutual recognition when basically what we are aiming for is harmonization, but that is not what we should be aiming for. What is your philosophy on that and what happens in practice?