Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ladies and gentlemen, good morning. Welcome to the Committee and thank you for your interest in such an important topic as this.
I want you to know, right from the start, Mr. Chairman, that I will be sharing my time with my colleague. We don't really know how things will go afterwards; we may not have another opportunity.
Based on what we have seen, the SPP clearly represents a threat to Canada's sovereignty. You may be surprised to hear that I am concerned about Canada's sovereignty, but it is a tremendous concern to me because, without Canada's sovereignty, Quebec will have difficulty asserting its own. That's the reason why I see this as an important issue. I want things to be perfectly clear.
In March of 2005, there was an SPP meeting. A number of things were discussed at that time: outlining approaches, developing strategies and fostering economic growth, competitiveness and quality of life. In that part, it was also stated that every country had agreed as well to establish departmental working groups, through the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, whose mandate would be to consult stakeholders. The intention was obviously to consult the business community. That is the whole rationale for this partnership—these are business executives. Mention was also made of state and municipal governments, and even non-governmental organizations. Earlier, the questions made it clear that not one of you with no direct connection to the business world had been consulted.
We know that any economic issue involves a societal choice, and that those choices have to be consistent with what individuals are seeking. That is the reason why people talk about consultations. Some say that everything should be completely rejected.
What are you suggesting in the way of a real consultation process? How would you participate in such a process?