The WTO focuses on common rules, whether or not the members or participants bring to the table a great deal of economic power in a particular negotiation or whether they are relatively less powerful in negotiation. That's the primary difference between the process of FTAs and the WTO. For Canada, the common rules and our subsequent willingness to go and clarify our rights and our partners' obligations through dispute settlement processes, which are there to be used, very much speak to the benefits of Canada.
FTAs have been for Canada somewhat defensive. The United States, Australia, and others have typically cut their FTA deals with countries such as Colombia, Peru, the Central American four, or others prior to Canada's engaging. Our goal in the FTA world is to ensure that our relative smaller level of power and ability to exert power in these bilateral negotiations doesn't result in institutionalized discrimination against Canadian products. And that has happened in the past. That doesn't necessarily speak to our advantage as a country like Canada, which must first depend on common rules of trade.
There are potential advantages in FTAs. When they're negotiated, when there's a great deal of consultation and communication between the negotiators and the affected sectors, we can achieve some interesting and positive breakthroughs, but there's risk. The WTO will always usurp the potential benefits of individual FTAs.
The one potential exception to that rule is a trade accord with the EU. This is a very wealthy market of a half-billion people, a market with limited competitive forces that put us at risk, while at the same time it's consumers who have the money, willingness, and attention to pay for the high quality that is Canadian products.