I would just qualify my remarks when I said the principal role of free trade, but free trade can open markets, of course, notably in, say, commodities agriculture.
I think the CEPA can assist with that, notably in areas like trade in uranium, lentils, and perhaps wheat, perhaps in LNG, liquefied natural gas. Half of the trade between Canada and India, as I understand it, is held by Saskatchewan. There are opportunities.
Just by way of comparison, Canada and Europe had a relatively basic framework. It came out of this third option from the Trudeau years. It was a fairly modest vehicle for facilitating trade and investment—trade and investment subcommittees, periodic reviews of trade irritants, and so on and so forth. Then the relationship, as it deepened and became more complex, necessitated, I would argue, the CETA. I would say that with India, the goal would be more than the third option-type TISC, trade and investment, a CEPA, but it won't be as ambitious as the CETA, which is the EU-Canada deal.
It's something that goes beyond just a shop, to talk, and sort of keep looking over and over at the same trade issues, but it's not going to be as ambitious as NAFTA or something like that.
It can have value. I think the key value is going to be trade in commodities, services, the movement of people, and also, as much as possible, predictability and certainty around investment and the opportunity to participate in procurement markets.