Thank you very much.
This is a complicated question. This is an opportunity to call into question the very relevance of trade agreements. We shouldn't only wonder about how we can improve them but wonder even if they should exist in the first place.
In our region, we haven't done the preliminary work that should be necessary before signing such an agreement. Ultimately, the treaty is a paradoxical one because our region.... Well, we've already had agreements like this in our region, but in this case, we've forgotten to negotiate about human rights and incorporate them into the treaty. In some cases, the treaty even undermines human rights, because we're constantly giving priority to economic issues. We're prioritizing economic development, trade in goods, and all of that at the expense of other questions—for example, labour mobility. Look at the border wall issue, which is a crying shame.
Very often, for example, for indigenous people, we haven't signed the same agreements. For example, Canada did not sign convention number 169 of the ILO, unlike Mexico. I don't think Canada signed that agreement.
We need to take the opportunity of these negotiations to really question the relevance of the agreement and to consider in-depth issues such as human rights, which are currently not discussed at all in the treaty. As Santiago was saying earlier, Canada could take on a greater role in the negotiations with Mexico, the whole region, and the entire world. It could even replace and take over the space that the U.S. has left vacant.
We need regional interests and the interests of individuals to be treated as more important than the interests of big corporations, which are often defended by foreign nations, as we've seen with the Canadian embassy in Mexico.