Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, when we examine a trade agreement implementation bill in committee, there is not much that we can amend, but this is one of the few things that we can change. Since the implementation bill has to change the legal system to recognize the ISDS, it is a legal clause. However, I am always just about the only committee member to vote against that clause. I vote in favour of most of the clauses in these agreements, and I generally vote in favour of the trade agreements themselves, but I always vote against this particular clause. In the past two Parliaments, when the NDP was a recognized party, its members usually voted with me against these agreements. I was not the only one to vote against them, but now I am. I do not understand how we can abdicate our sovereignty in this way.
As my colleague said, this likely puts these companies above states, but it also creates pressure upstream on public decision-makers. It creates a climate of self-censorship. It is also important to point out that the potential victims of the actions of multinationals do not have the same rights under trade agreements. There is no protection mechanism. The government often boasts about the chapters on the environment and workers' rights, but they are often purely symbolic. There is no legal mechanism for that, whereas the multinationals have a mechanism to protect their right to profit.
