Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 1 of 1
View Daniel Blaikie Profile
With respect to chapter 28, the NDP salutes the removal of investor-state dispute settlement clauses from NAFTA, but there's some concern that chapter 28 is quite prejudicial against public interest regulation.
I'm wondering if there might be some remedial work that Canada could do on its own, including a more wide-ranging definition of who an interested party, or an interested person would be, so that it's not narrowly defined as someone with a business interest in the regulation, but also recognize the interests that citizens might have. It is with respect to the environment or indigenous people worrying about any infringement of their rights, or workers who are concerned about the effect that a regulation, or lack of regulation, of a particular sector might have for them.
Could you offer some remarks to that effect in terms of how we might try to mitigate some of the potential negative impacts of chapter 28?
Result: 1 - 1 of 1

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data