Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.
International Trade committee I wouldn't call them instructions at this point. We've certainly had a dialogue about potential improvements that could be made with respect to the approach to investment in CETA, and that's what we're exploring with the Europeans now. Clearly the EU first came to us with some of
February 16th, 2016Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
International Trade committee No. There hasn't been a discussion of eliminating any kind of avenue for investors to pursue potential claims because you can't pursue those kinds of avenues through domestic courts. Domestic courts have no authority to adjudicate obligations in international treaties. If we're g
February 16th, 2016Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
International Trade committee That's an issue we're continuing to work on, and this is in conjunction with other departments that are more directly involved in the pharmaceutical area. We have been doing an evaluation of the potential costs and doing some modelling of what the expectations would be for those
February 16th, 2016Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
International Trade committee I wouldn't want to speculate, because this is still under design, but I would assume that the most likely outcome would be some kind of payment to provinces and territories to offset those additional costs. It's certainly been discussed in the past.
February 16th, 2016Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
International Trade committee Well, I think we're going to try to make sure that we follow what the EU is doing and make sure that our ratification process is in line with theirs. It's not to our advantage to go in advance of them.
February 16th, 2016Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
International Trade committee No, we're not reopening the negotiations at all.
February 16th, 2016Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
International Trade committee That's right.
February 16th, 2016Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
International Trade committee Thanks. The negotiations were completed back in August of 2014. Since then, we've been going through a legal review of the text, which has taken a bit longer than we expected. It's virtually complete now. We're now having some discussions with the EU with respect to some inves
February 16th, 2016Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
Fisheries committee —on what our deal looks like.
November 21st, 2013Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
Fisheries committee Well, I think I'd have two reactions to that. First of all, by getting the agreement first on our side between Canada and the EU, it gives us a chance to develop those markets, to develop joint projects, and to develop customer relationships, to be in there first and get establi
November 21st, 2013Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
Fisheries committee Hardly, no. I would say that this is going to represent a real opportunity for growth in our fisheries industry, the likes of which we haven't seen for a very, very long time.
November 21st, 2013Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
Fisheries committee My personal view is that, yes, that provides lots of time to make that kind of adjustment. Again, this only involves removing minimum processing requirements on exports to the EU, not to any other markets. We don't actually need them or use them that much on exports to the EU. In
November 21st, 2013Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
Fisheries committee Yes, indeed, it will.
November 21st, 2013Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
Fisheries committee The Americans have just started their negotiations with the EU. I think they've held two rounds now, and they're at the very early stages. They've got a lot of negotiation ahead of them.
November 21st, 2013Committee meeting
Steve Verheul
Fisheries committee The deal that we've negotiated is between Canada and the EU. The U.S. will have no say—
November 21st, 2013Committee meeting
Steve Verheul