Mr. Chairman, I thank my hon. colleague for his eloquent statement and his question. Not to agree with him would be wrong. What he has indicated in his remarks was exactly what I had stated in my speech.
When we have 142 countries at the table and 142 guidelines, it is pretty hard to get 2 or 3 countries to have a consensus, let alone 142.
As the hon. member has said, it is very important to have a set of rules in place that all 142 countries live by, not 142 guidelines. I think that is where our weaknesses have been in the past when we have gone to negotiations and such, that each country has its own principles and its own guidelines but when push comes to shove at the end there has to be a basic set of rules that each country has to adhere to so that we can come to a consensus using a set of rules.
My hon. colleague insisted on transparency. I guess that was very well illustrated after the Seattle conference where the Maude Barlows of the world were saying that there was not a transparency and enough input. I know for sure that the agriculture committee met with several groups that were well received. I was also privilege to some information about it being vital that transparency be a part of these negotiations.
What came out of those discussions was the de-restricting and public release of working papers and agendas, the public release of submissions in dispute settlement cases, an increase in WTO consultation with NGOs, regular meetings of WTO member parliamentarians and the creation of ad hoc expert advisory boards.
With all those things being incorporated, I think it perhaps will dispel any myths that this is all done in seclusion. Everyone does have a way of participating. I think it will be a benefit in the end.