Mr. Speaker, let me again try to explain to the hon. member. The provisions of the bill are limited by the agreement on internal trade. That is the case in the wording of clause 9 of the bill. It is the same wording as applies in the implementing legislation for the World Trade Organization and NAFTA. It is normal wording.
The agreement limits very specifically the occasions when the federal government is involved in a dispute resolution. Most of the agreement on internal trade has to do with regulating disputes between provinces. Only in the rare case where a company is discriminated against because of its federal status or because it is federally regulated would the federal government be involved in the process of dispute resolution which starts first
with consultation, second with the appointment of a panel, and then the resolution of the dispute by the panel.
If the dispute were resolved in favour of the federal government, if the province refused to take the measures that were dictated by the panel, if a year passed without that happening and further consultation did not occur, then possibly the federal government could withhold benefits in the sectors concerned with the dispute or the sectors involved in the agreement on internal trade.
This does not at all pertain to the issues of health and social transfers raised by the hon. member in his first question. It is ridiculous.