Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. O'Sullivan for his most helpful context-setting for the work we have to do. I will ask three questions. The first relates to the fact that Mr. O'Sullivan has said this is more than a trade deal and is the precursor to the new generation of trade deals, including services, regulatory matters, labour standards and the environment. Will Mr. O'Sullivan provide the committee with a brief understanding of why it was felt we would move away from trade deals to have a much broader set of arrangements to be negotiated between the European Union and other states or groups of states?

Second, the Singapore judgment from the European Court of Justice seems, according to the presentation Mr. O'Sullivan has given us, to have changed the ratification and probably the content of future trade deals that will be negotiated by the European Union. Is CETA the last of its kind? Will all future trade arrangements to be negotiated by the Commission be fundamentally different in character post the Singapore judgment?

My third question is the most important, from my perspective. It is the most contentious issue and the one that we as Deputies have received most correspondence on. Like everybody else on the committee, I have had enormous bilateral discussions with groups and individuals in my constituency and further afield on the investment protection mechanism, the so-called investment court system that Mr. O'Sullivan alluded to. I have two simple questions in relation to this most fundamental issue. Can we simply disconnect the investment court system from the CETA agreement? The likelihood is that Canada would trust European courts to be fair and give fair judgments and I presume European countries would trust the Canadian court system to be impartial and fair in judgments of any disputes that might arise. That would obviate the need for a parallel system that sits outside our court system and potentially outside our constitutional system. Why would we not proceed with the agreement as has been provisionally implemented to date, seek bilaterally to dislodge the investment court system from the agreement and seek Canada's acceptance of that? What would be the likelihood of that?