Mr. Speaker, I am back from my riding and I just became aware of the very interesting debate on chapter 11 of NAFTA being held here today.
We are hearing pretty incredible things in this House today. I do not object to the remarks of my colleague, who spoke of the benefits of international trade, stating that $1 invested abroad brings in $2 in return, and of other such spinoffs. I am not against that, and I could hardly be.
What we should be very careful about today is the wording of chapter 11 which, I believe, has a profound effect on democracy.
My fellow citizens are appalled when I explain to them that companies and multinational corporations are able to sue governments, which are elected by the people, and take them to court.
Take for instance the case of Ethyl Corporation, which is probably the most talked about. I want to address my comments to the people in the galleries, because when they hear that for the first time, I am sure they will think it goes against common sense.
We have adopted an environmental rule. I voted in favour of that rule because I agreed with the government on the need for a rule to ban the use of MMT. However, an American corporation sued the Canadian government for potential market loss. This turned against the Canadian government before the NAFTA tribunal. So, I believe that the question to my colleague opposite—