Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Forsyth, welcome back to the committee.
In the previous meeting, one of our colleagues remarked, “The trade between Canada and Ecuador is so modest, so why do we need it?” That was the thought, but we need trade agreements with big markets, small markets, all markets. I think we have 15 agreements covering 51 countries. The more we have, the better. Every small thing helps.
Again, in my view, the process of negotiation many times brings benefits. Maybe the Canada-U.K. trade negotiations are being paused, and have been paused with Canada-India. Very specifically, two days back I learned that one of the demands from Canada to India was for tax exemptions for pension fund investments. I'm told that, of the $75 billion Canada has invested in India, the bulk of it is from our pension plans. I was told that the last budget in India—I believe this month—had given exemptions to pension funds from the income tax provisions, and the only pension funds investing in India are from Canada, so that is the added benefit. In my view, it is important that whatever market we have—Ecuador, or any small or big market—we should continue to go on.
I have a couple of questions. I'll combine them, and then you can address them.
One is that, in the last meeting again, some people came, saying, “We shouldn't have ISDS.” My view on ISDS provisions is that we should look out for the interests of Canada, our economy, corporations and businesses. Can you elaborate on the importance of ISDS? It can vary from market to market. It may not be relevant to every single market we negotiate with, but why is that important in general?
The other one is that you mentioned the expected benefits will be moderate. Even though the benefits are moderate, how important is it in the bigger picture of Canada, having free trade agreements with different countries in different parts of the world?