Thank you.
Quoting somebody isn't attacking them, and the issue of sovereignty is surely at play here. It's certainly been used in the discussions. I don't see why it's not relevant to the point at hand.
The Council of Canadians wrote: Over the years, our national sovereignty has been diminished first by the Charter of Rights, then the FTA and NAFTA. But they all pale beside the coming MAI.
As you can see, the complaint is against reductions of sovereignty towards the individual and reductions of sovereignty externally. The case of AbitibiBowater is admittedly a reduction in sovereignty. It binds Canada to various international trade agreements, which are important for our well-being, given the very small size of the Canadian market and the fact that we need specialization in Canada, that we need specialization for our own industries to go out to the world market and to efficiently deliver goods here. Unless we continue to respect....
The point I'm trying to make here is that sovereignty should not be taken as an automatically good thing. In fact, through much of past history, the diminution of sovereignty has worked to the benefit of individuals and of economic growth. We are simply here following the rule of international law in compensating for the loss of property rights, and that concludes my statement.