Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Trew, I want to talk about investor-state provisions. Canada and the European Union nations are all modern democracies with well-functioning judicial systems. They respect the rule of law. Their judicial systems incorporate the concepts of transparency, security of tenure for judges, and appropriate appellate processes.
Critics of investor-state provisions point out the serious deficiencies in this regard, where trade disputes are not heard in domestic courts with all those protections, but rather are heard before international tribunals where the adjudicators don't have security of tenure. In fact, there are allegations of conflict of interest, because they slide in and out of adjudicating and then acting for the various corporations that may have complaints. Also, there is no appropriate appeal process, and transparency issues exist as well.
Is there any reason that Canada and the European Union shouldn't subject trade disputes to our domestic judiciaries?