Thank you for the presentations today.
Mr. MacPhee, you mentioned something that I want to dig into a little bit and that's the ISDS provision, the investor-state dispute settlement resolution process that exists in the TPP. For folks who don't know, in chapter 11 of NAFTA, it was the first time that two developed countries engaged in this type of an established resolution system together. Previously it was always a developing country coming to a developed one. What we've seen under NAFTA is we've become the most sued country in the world under this provision. So $190 million has been paid out, but the asks are now in the billions, and we have cases against us, currently, that are creeping that way because they simply contain this projected future loss number that's pulled out of the air.
We have a very progressive court system here in Canada, so this is where I think most Canadians question the need for this non-reciprocal...essentially a tribunal that exists with three for-profit arbitrators determining whether or not we can legislate for good in Canada.
You mentioned that it weakens legislative ability, and as a member of Parliament that's a deep concern to me. We see cases across Canada—you mentioned the quarry case, in particular—and because you are here speaking mostly about the environment, you know there's a huge human cost to our not being able to legislate for the good of Canadian people, in particular around our environment.
I want to ask you if you think that the ISDS will hinder our ability to legislate or regulate to essentially honour what we signed on to in Paris around our environmental commitments to Canadians.