My name is Pierre Yves Serinet and, as a citizen, I would like to respond to some of the comments made this morning about the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement.
I first want to point out that Mr. Lebel is thumping his chest over the Conservative government's great transparency, but that's not true. No one, aside from the business sector, has really been consulted with regard to the TPP.
His colleague is giving us figures, and we are talking about billions of dollars and lawsuits in the millions of dollars. We do have to compare oranges to oranges, and not oranges to potatoes. I think that the dispute resolution mechanism between investors and states limits governments' ability to regulate in the areas of the environment, labour law and even the economy. This mechanism prevents governments from prescribing results, ensuring that they are supporting local job creation and regional development, and promoting policies on innovation and the environment.
A study is lacking—and this is an appeal to the government—on NAFTA's consequences over the past 20 years. I think we need to move away from this rhetoric whereby free trade is inherently good. Let's carry out the study.
We conducted such a study on NAFTA's impact. The government promised more jobs, more prosperity, better wealth distribution, enhanced environmental protection and better protection of labour rights. The report card indicates a big fat zero in all those areas, whether we are talking about job creation, job quality or wealth concentration.
Under this economic model, we have not seen an expansion of healthy social safeguards over the past 25 years. We see that by looking at the figures. We will submit our brief on the topic. I think that Canadians can submit briefs to the committee to raise its awareness of what aspects of the economic model have a negative impact and must be reconsidered.
These kinds of international dialogues must provide an opportunity to rethink the economic model. The government must make sure that the economy is serving Canadians and creating jobs. Most importantly, it should promote the fundamental principles of cooperation and complementarity. The idea of competition at any cost and profits at any cost must be rethought. We are facing challenges in terms of the environment, quality of life and distribution of wealth. The discussion on the free trade economic model must enable that reflection. I think that we have much to gain by broadening the debate and making it public.
It's pretty appalling. I don't know how much the committee has done to attract more people, but I did not see a press release inviting Canadians to participate. I think that the public debate must be broadened and be based on rigorous numbers and studies. The public debate must also be expanded so that people can act on the decisions our elected officials are ultimately making.
Thank you.