Mr. Speaker, clearly the member opposite was not listening quite as attentively as she could have been.
First of all, I said that we have to move cautiously. I talked about a particular sector, the service sector. In looking at the service sector, I said there were opportunities. We are looking at opportunities. I made the comment that the Americans are often the biggest free traders, but when it comes to having their own interests at heart they often put up barriers. The member mentioned P.E.I. potatoes as an example.
I am not suggesting and have never suggested in my comments this evening that we simply go straight ahead without being cautious and without making sure that our interests are protected. I presume the member understands the fact that the national interest is paramount. Therefore, if in fact under free trade or under NAFTA there are issues we feel are not serving our interests, there are, as there have been, mechanisms to address those issues.
However, I would think that under the FTAA we have to make sure that the right mechanisms are there, whether they are tribunals or whatever they happen to be, in order to make sure we are protected. Not to do so would not be in the national interest. Therefore I have highlighted only one area in which I feel that there may be enhanced opportunity for Canadian companies. However, I did say as well that we have to make sure we protect and have control of our health care, culture and environment. If in fact at the end of the day we are not able to do that, then I would not support it.
When members are listening to what I am saying, they have to be very careful. I am looking at one area in which I do see an opportunity, but again we must go slowly.