Mr. Chair, since I have been at Fisheries and Oceans, this file has been first and foremost on my desk and has probably taken more of my time than any other file we have dealt with.
A couple of delegations have gone to Europe and during those visits have attempted to meet with as many parliamentarians as possible. When I was there, we had three or four full days of meetings with groups of parliamentarians and I met with senators. Another delegation had gone prior to that.
We have done some advertising through the media in the European Union. Ambassador Sullivan, as I said, who has been hired as our fisheries conservation ambassador, has spent countless hours, along with staff, in the European Union making personal contact with the very people whose jobs it will be to make the laws of the land.
All of that being said, it has not changed the minds of the European parliamentarians, which is very unfortunate. They take us aside and tell us privately that our position makes sense and that they support it, but that it is a political issue for them. It is an uphill battle.
With regard to the WTO, I know our trade lawyers are looking into the actual wording of what the European parliament voted on today. Our minister has said, unequivocally, that we would take this to the WTO and lodge a complaint because we feel it is contrary to WTO rules.
Of course, announcing a free trade agreement with Europe is a good thing. We hope that many businesses in this country will benefit from a free trade agreement with Europe, including the fisheries in Newfoundland, for example.
There are many benefits to this agreement. I see this as two separate items.