Specifically, the language that there's issue with is taking out the reference to “directly” or “indirectly”, which appears lower down on the page. It's referenced several times, actually, throughout the changes that I've amended here. There's a thought that this unnecessarily broadens the language, and it could introduce new concepts. Again, it's not that the generics have been clear in saying it is not required in CETA; they're concerned about the interpretation of the language being broadened by the usage of “directly” or “indirectly”.
On December 14th, 2016. See this statement in context.