As we speak, we have people in Europe to speak against CETA, so quite clearly, that is where we stand.
One of the things I'd like to point out, as you go through your list, is that these documents are no longer traditional trade agreements.
When I cut my teeth in the early 1980s in this space, trade agreements were about dumping, safeguards, tariffs, and that sort of thing. These agreements now are political agreements that deal with wide swaths of public policy, and most importantly, investment. You have to stop talking about it as a trade agreement. It's a trade and investment agreement. For most other major players in this, it's the investment side that's the most important, so I would encourage you to do that.
I'll mention one very last thing, as you've opened the window for me. We are quite concerned that there are silos continuing in this conversation. You cannot talk today about trade and investment without talking at the same time about climate change mitigation. You cannot. This committee cannot release a report without sitting down with its colleagues on the environment committee and trying to hash out who's going to take priority.
Are climate policies going to take priority over our trade policies? They are going to butt heads directly in the next few years. The TransCanada litigation in the U.S. is a warning of what's going to be happening here as we start to take our obligations to deal with carbon budgets and that sort of thing seriously.