I'm just saying that's the concern with respect to softwood lumber. That's my concern here.
I also want to echo the comments made by my colleague with respect to a concern about the wording of this motion.
If I could make a friendly amendment to get further clarification, there are two points I have concerns about. One is the fourth line, starting with “including trade measures to support these sectors; systemically implement the recommendations of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal”. Can we get more clarity on what these recommendations are? I have a concern we are supporting a motion that doesn't outline what the specific recommendations are. I would like clarity on that.
If you continue to read that motion all the way up to the point where it says “bring Canada's trade laws into line with those of the United States and the European Union with respect to anti-dumping measures”, the friendly amendment would add “consistent with WTO guidelines.” Then we can continue on with “carry out open and thorough studies on the impact of all ongoing trade negotiations.”
So it's a friendly amendment that would clarify that particular change in our approach to anti-dumping measures.
I would also like to ask Monsieur Cardin for clarification on what specific recommendations he is referring to when he talks about the Canadian International Trade Tribunal.