With the Canada-Colombia deal it isn't so much that there's a parallel agreement. What we have is a secondary addition to the deal. It happened quite late in the process and it was added both to the deal itself and also to the implementing legislation, which is of course very important because that gives it some domestic legal teeth. This is a binding national legal requirement now.
That feels to us to be actually an important way to go on something like this because it does anchor it in law that there's a legal obligation and expectation, which therefore lays out clarity around when it's going to happen, who's supposed to conduct it, and those sorts of things.
So that's the kind of approach we would recommend with respect to something like the TPP as well, that there both be measures taken to bring human rights into the agreement itself.... There are a lot of free trade agreements that have this, not so many Canadian free trade deals but others, especially European Union ones, that have provisions that even just specifically highlight and recognize the applicability of international human rights treaties. It's not seen as a separate body of law that has no relevance to this treaty. It's right there in the treaty and recognized as having applicability. That's a very good starting point.
But then, to give it some meaning, we think that the best practice is to go this route of requiring human rights impact assessments. That's what gives the tools and the opportunity to truly study and understand the human rights implications and consequences of a particular trade deal, and coming out of that, to identify the recommendations that will address the concerns.