Ms Suzanne Drisdelle:

If I may, I would like to answer this question. I certainly am aware of the issues discussed in the media in Ireland around the investor court system. I would like to clarify that the investor court system replaces the investor state dispute settlement, ISDS. One thing I have noticed in the public discourse in Ireland is some confusion about the difference between the two. All trade agreements that include investment protection - not all of them do - require a platform for the resolution of disputes.

In democratic countries such as Canada and Ireland, the platform provides an open, transparent facility for companies to pursue arbitration or even mediation and consultation in the case of a dispute. Unfortunately, disputes are a reality in international business. The ICS provides an innovative approach to investment dispute resolution and procedures to resolve disputes in a fair and transparent manner. The process includes elements such as enhanced consultation and mediation, which were not available in the previous version, the ISDS, and that is why Canada agreed with the European Union to revise the older version in CETA.

CETA will not put in jeopardy or question the validity of our respective democratic and judicial systems. It may not be clear that investors can, if they want, go through domestic courts for these kinds of issues. CETA does not prevent companies from doing this.

I ask my colleague, Mr. East, who is more familiar with the technical sides of the agreement to expand on it.