Report

Introduction

A Canadian delegation including eight members of the Canada–United Kingdom Inter-Parliamentary Association and five members of the Canada–Europe Parliamentary Association took part in a bilateral visit to London, England and Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom (U.K.) from 13 to 17 March 2017. Accompanying the delegation was Ms. Sonya Norris, from the Parliamentary Information and Research Service of the Library of Parliament as adviser to the delegation, and Mr. Jean-François Pagé and Ms. Guyanne Desforges, Secretaries of the Canada–U.K. and Canada–Europe associations, respectively.

On 23 June 2016, a referendum (commonly known as Brexit) was held in the U.K. on whether it should remain within the European Union (EU). With a 72.2% voter turnout, 51.9% of those who voted chose to leave the EU. Regional biases indicated that the majority of voters in London, Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU; Scotland had the largest majority with 62% voting to remain. However, as the U.K. proceeds to carry out the will of the people, it has become evident that much of the procedure as well as the consequences of the break from the EU going forward are unknown.

Concurrently, the Canada–EU Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) is at the final approval stages for provisional implementation. CETA, which covers virtually all sectors and aspects of Canada–EU trade, would be the first agreement to establish close economic ties between the two jurisdictions. The consequences for CETA once the U.K. has left the EU, as well as the trade consequences for Canada with the U.K., are another unknown.

Given the importance of these ongoing initiatives for both associations,, the Canada–United Kingdom Inter-Parliamentary Association and the Canada–Europe Parliamentary Association agreed to send a joint delegation to participate in this bilateral visit.

Visit to London, England, United Kingdom

From 13 to 15 March, the delegation participated in several meetings in London, England which included a briefing with officials at Canada House, the Canadian High Commission to the United Kingdom, followed by bilateral discussions with Members of Parliament, Peers, House of Commons Library Research Analysts and the director of a policy think tank.

A. Briefing at Canada House

The delegation began its mission with a tour of Canada House, followed by a briefing from Alan Kessel, Canada’s Deputy High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, along with staff of the Canadian High Commission. Mr. Kessel emphasized that there is currently considerable tension within the EU as a whole, as well as within the U.K., in the aftermath of the Brexit vote. He indicated that nobody was prepared for the “leave” result and that there are many challenges ahead. The delegation was told that political and economic stability in Europe is important to Canada, as the EU is its second largest trading partner, and the U.K. is Canada’s largest trading partner within the EU.

In terms of Brexit, delegates were told that the U.K.’s High Court recently ruled that the referendum was advisory in nature, rather than legally binding. As such, the government tabled a European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill in the House of Commons on 26 January 2017, which would allow Parliament to provide the U.K. Prime Minister with the authority to notify the European Council of the U.K.’s intention to withdraw from the EU by invoking Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union. At the time of the briefing, the House of Commons was set to consider two amendments to the bill that had been passed in the House of Lords.

Once the U.K.’s intention to withdraw from the EU has been invoked, it was explained that the real work of negotiating the exit will commence. Prime Minister Theresa May has already indicated the U.K.’s intention to pursue a “hard Brexit” which would mean the U.K.’s withdrawal from the European Economic Area (Single Market) and the customs union. The negotiations were described as including three elements:

1. The Article 50 negotiations that must be completed within two years, which were described as divorce proceedings that could derail everything.
2. The future relationship between the U.K. and the EU comprising both the economic and the security relationship.
3. The Great Repeal Bill which must be passed by the U.K. Parliament by the time the Article 50 negotiations are complete. The Great Repeal Bill would repeal the European Communities Act of 1972 (which automatically implements EU law in the U.K.) to allow EU laws to be incorporated into British law on a case by case basis.

In terms of CETA, delegates were told that it would be the most modern free trade agreement to date. Once ratified, CETA will be larger than NAFTA in terms of the broader scope of trade issues and the much larger market. However, the delegation was also told that the Canadian Trade Commission is struggling with three “unknowns” with respect to how Canada’s businesses might be affected by Brexit:

1. The future trading relationship with the U.K. Although a CETA-like trade agreement is expected, the timing is unknown. Until a free trade deal can be implemented, tariffs may be imposed.
2. The movement of people/talent across borders is not yet defined.
3. 3. Data management across borders may require new legislation, but this has not been determined.

The delegation was also briefed about devolution of powers in the U.K. whereby the U.K. Parliament at Westminster has transferred the authority to legislate on certain matters to the devolved legislatures in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. In this context, delegates were told that Scottish independence is likely to become an issue again, as it was in 2014 when an independence referendum was held. During the course of the briefing, Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon released a statement indicating that Scotland would seek permission from Westminster for a new independence referendum to be held between fall 2018 and spring 2019.

As well, the delegation heard about the border issue between Northern Ireland, U.K. and the Republic of Ireland (an EU member). In recent history, there has been an open (or soft) border between these two jurisdictions which have enjoyed a “common travel area.” Delegates were told that Brexit negotiations will have to include discussions about the future of this border.

B. Meeting with the Chair of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee

The delegation met with Laurence Robertson, MP and Chair of the House of Commons Select Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, which is an all-party committee appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Northern Ireland Office and its associated public bodies. Mr. Robertson explained that the committee undertakes inquiries of its own choosing and then makes recommendations to government, which must respond within two months. He indicated that the committee strives to reach consensus on its reports.

Mr. Robertson described the structure of the Northern Ireland Assembly whereby following a general election the party with the most seats elects a First Minister while the party with the second largest number of seats elects a Deputy First Minister. However, he told delegates that following the recent general election held on 2 March 2017, in which the Designated Unionist Party garnered the most seats and appointed Arlene Foster as First Minister, the second party, Sinn Féin, refused to name a Deputy First Minister in protest over Ms. Foster’s appointment. If no agreement is reached to form a coalition government, either a new general election may be called or there may be direct rule of Northern Ireland by Westminster.

C. Briefing by Research Analysts of the House of Commons Library on the Impact of Brexit across Policy Areas

Vaughne Miller, research analyst for the House of Commons Library, talked about next steps following the Brexit vote. She described the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill and stated that it would be receiving Royal Assent shortly and that as soon as that happened, Prime Minister May would trigger Article 50 in short order. She explained that as soon as Article 50 is invoked, the clock starts on the two years that are allowed for negotiations. In this regard, she suggested that the U.K. has two priorities, the customs union and the rights of U.K. and EU citizens across borders. However, she emphasized that the structure and process for negotiations have not been agreed upon and that the answer to multiple questions about embarking on these negotiations is “I don’t know.”

Another analyst, Dominic Webb, discussed CETA and how the U.K. will be affected by Brexit in terms of trade. He explained that CETA was signed in October 2016 and that the European Parliament voted to ratify it on 15 February 2017. Once Canada has passed CETA legislation, which is expected in spring 2017, the new free trade agreement can be provisionally implemented (about 98% of it) pending final ratification by EU Member States. Mr. Webb indicated that the U.K. hopes to continue free trade with Canada once it has withdrawn from the EU. While he emphasized that no official trade talks can commence between these two jurisdictions until the U.K. has left the EU, he stated that preliminary discussions began in early 2017.

D. Meeting with Members of the House of Commons Select Committee on Exiting the European Union

The delegation met with Alistair Carmichael, MP and Member of the House of Commons Select Committee on Exiting the European Union along with James Reis, clerk of the committee. Delegates were told that the role of the committee is to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Department for Exiting the European Union. The Chair of the committee, as determined by the Party Whips, is a Labour MP. Delegates were told that this committee is twice the size of other Select Committees in the House of Commons with 21 members; 12 of whom had voted to “remain” and 9 of whom had voted to “leave” the EU. Despite the greater number of members who preferred to remain in the EU, Mr. Carmichael indicated that the Chair strives to move discussions beyond members’ personal positions with the goal of producing unanimous reports.

The first report of this committee, entitled The process for exiting the European Union and the Government’s negotiating objectives, was issued on 14 January 2017. Its second report was issued on 5 March 2017, entitled The Government’s negotiating objectives: the rights of UK and EU citizens. Both reports were unanimous. Finally, the delegation heard that this committee will continue to operate after the U.K. has withdrawn from the EU but it will have a different mandate, namely to oversee the Exiting the European Union department as it sets up government bodies that mirror EU counterparts.

E. Meeting with the Chair of the UK-Europe All Party Parliamentary Group and Members of Open Britain

Following a tour of the Houses of Parliament in the Palace of Westminster, the delegation met with the Chair of the UK-Europe All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG), Anna Soubry, who was accompanied by other members of the committee as well as members of the non-governmental group called Open Britain. Both of these groups advocated for the “remain” side during the U.K. referendum. Together, the presenters expressed concern about the effects a “hard Brexit” would have on the U.K., although they indicated that to date, the Governor of the Bank of England was navigating all of the uncertainty skilfully. The delegation was told that the groups’ preference would have been to remain within the Single Market and that there is scepticism about how well the U.K. will do in negotiations with the EU. The prevailing concern of these two pro-Europe groups has to do with the high number of “unknowns” that have to become “knowns” within a very short timeframe and the contentious domestic issues surrounding Northern Ireland’s soft border and Scotland’s revisiting of independence.

F. Working Lunch with Members of the British-Canada All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG)

The delegation was joined by a delegation from the Ontario government for a working lunch with several members of the British-Canada APPG. The British-Canada APPG encourages political interest in Canadian politics by meeting with Canadian politicians and promotes relations with Canada through meetings with officials at the Canadian High Commission.

Members of the British-Canada APPG expressed a variety of views about the U.K.’s decision to withdraw from the EU ranging from “it was a flawed referendum” to “everything will be fine” to “we’re well on the way to a dis-unified UK.” Despite the range of views and apparent tensions, all members of the group are united in their desire to maintain strong relations with Canada as well as all Commonwealth countries. In fact, delegates were told that the Canada–U.K. relationship is stronger than Brexit.

G. Meeting with Members of the House of Lords European Union Select Committee

The delegation met with several Peer members of the European Union Select Committee of the House of Lords. This committee, which scrutinizes U.K. policy in respect of the EU and seeks to influence EU policy and legislation, operates through six sub-committees. Delegates were told by Lord Boswell of Aynho, Chair of the committee, that the focus of this committee and its sub-committees is Brexit. Several Peers repeated the sentiment that Brexit was unexpected, that many questions remain unanswered about the withdrawal process and that it will be very difficult to meet the two-year timeline on negotiations.

This focus on Brexit has resulted in this committee producing a cascade of inquiries and reports, including parliamentary scrutiny of Brexit negotiations, evaluating the legal process for withdrawal from the EU, implications for devolution, etc. The U.K. government must respond to each report issued by the European Union Select Committee. Lord Boswell emphasized that once the U.K.’s withdrawal from the EU is complete, it will be very important to maintain a strong relationship with the EU.

H. Meeting with Members of the House of Commons Select Committee on International Trade

Delegates met with MPs Angus MacNeil (Chair), Liam Byrne and Nigel Evans to discuss the work of the House of Commons Select Committee on International Trade. This Select Committee is mandated to examine the administration, policy and expenditures of the Department of International Trade and its associated public bodies.

While the focus of this committee’s work does not provide specific insight regarding Brexit or CETA, Mr. MacNeil indicated that it had just conducted an inquiry into U.K. trade following Brexit. Delegates were told that the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland is of particular concern. While the U.K. has said it will pursue a hard Brexit and leave the customs union and single market, delegates were also told that many people feel certain that the “Good Friday Agreement” of 1998, which was instrumental in resolving conflict in Ireland and allowing for a common travel area and open border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, will be honoured. How these two issues can be resolved, however, is unclear at this time. Presenters also suggested that while Brexit may disrupt trade and the mobility of workers, at least temporarily, it is not expected to be an obstacle to travel for visitors to the U.K.

I. Meeting with the Director of Open Europe

Delegates met with the President of Open Europe, Henry Newman, who described the think tank as non-partisan, independent and centre right in ideology, but which remained neutral during the U.K. referendum. Open Europe conducts analyses on which to base policy discussions about the U.K.’s new relationship with the EU and the rest of the world.

Mr. Newman suggested that Prime Minister May has been able to unite her Conservative Party following a divisive Brexit campaign as she pursues a hard Brexit involving not only the U.K.’s withdrawal from the EU, but its removal from the European Economic Area as well as the customs union. He indicated that she promotes three advantages of Brexit for the U.K.: sovereign immigration policy; freedom from large financial contributions to the EU; and, no longer being under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (the highest Court of the EU).Mr. Newman further described the current political flux in France, the Netherlands and Germany, which will cause additional uncertainty for the U.K. He explained that the current balance of power in the EU is a “triangle” involving the U.K., France and Germany, and that U.K.’s exit will affect this balance. He further stated that changes in political interests in these and other countries may have an effect on EU stability.

J. Session of the House of Commons Select Committee on Exiting the European Union

Members of the delegation had the opportunity to briefly attend a session of the House of Commons Select Committee on Exiting the European Union, as a follow up to its meeting with members of this committee earlier in the program of activities. Appearing as a witness was David Davis, Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, who was questioned about the Brexit process and implications for trade, the economy, labour, etc. During his testimony, Secretary Davis revealed that no assessment has been conducted to measure the cost of EU withdrawal. He also suggested that reaching “no deal” at the end of the two-year negotiation period for Brexit would be better for the U.K. than a “bad deal.”

K. Meeting with Members of the House of Commons Select Committee on Scottish Affairs

Delegates met with several members of the House of Commons Select Committee on Scottish Affairs, including committee Chair Peter Wishart, MP. This committee is responsible for examining the administration, policy and expenditure of the Scotland Office, which includes relations with Scottish Parliament, and the Advocate General for Scotland. As the Scotland Office is responsible for promoting Scotland’s interest within the U.K., this committee is conducting the inquiry “Scotland’s Place in Europe” which pursues a solution to Brexit that includes negotiated terms that address Scotland’s preference for remaining within the EU’s Single Market. Members also described the “asymmetric devolution” in the U.K., whereby the devolved legislatures do not all have the same devolved powers and that Scotland may consider pursuing greater devolution from Westminster following Brexit, if not complete independence.

L. Luncheon with Lord Kilclooney

Delegates were joined by Lord Kilclooney of Armagh for their luncheon. Lord Kilclooney explained that he sought out the opportunity to speak with the Canadian delegation because of his long history of interest in the Trade and Industry file as well as the Foreign and Commonwealth file.

Visit to Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom

On 16 and 17 March, the delegation participated in several activities in Edinburgh, Scotland which included a tour of the unicameral Scottish Parliament and attendance at General Question Time as well as First Minister’s Question Time. Members also attended bilateral discussions with Members of Scottish Parliament (MSPs), the Presiding Officer, the Assistant Chief Executive, the Head of Office of the European Parliament’s Information Office and the Associate Director of the Centre on Constitutional Change.

A. Meeting with the Economy, Jobs and Fair Work Committee

Members of the delegation met with the Convener of the Economy, Jobs and Fair Work Committee, Gordon Lindhurst, MSP, and committee members Bill Bowman, MSP and Andy Wightman, MSP, as well as the committee clerk Alison Walker. Mr. Lindhurst addressed the committee’s recent inquiry into the economic impact of leaving the EU.

Mr. Lindhurst explained that the committee is responsible for scrutinizing the Scottish government and undertakes inquiries of its own choosing. The purpose of the committee’s recent inquiry on leaving the EU was to examine the effects on Scotland as compared to England. The inquiry focussed particularly on the impacts and opportunities for Scottish exporters and non-EU companies to invest in Scotland, as well as labour market issues such as worker migration and worker rights. He explained that 4% of the workforce in Scotland is made up of EU nationals. As well, he explained, the Scottish population is aging and younger Scots are leaving the country. Mr. Lindhurst and other members expressed some frustration at the lack of control Scotland has over many domestic issues including its economy. Comparisons were offered regarding the asymmetrical devolution and Scotland’s preference for more devolved powers and asymmetrical nationalism in Canada.

B. Meeting with the Convener and Members of the Culture, Tourism, Europe and External Relations Committee

Delegates met with the Convener Joan McAlpine as well as member Lewis Macdonald, along with Katy Orr, clerk, and Iain McIver, researcher, of the Culture, Tourism, Europe and External Relations Committee. The mandate of this committee is broad and covers all matters falling within the responsibility of the Secretary for Culture, Tourism and External Relations as well as the scrutiny of relevant EU matters. However, Ms. McAlpine noted that since the Brexit vote, the committee has focussed exclusively on issues related to the U.K.’s withdrawal from the EU and has received over 160 pieces of evidence as it scrutinizes the implications of Brexit.

The delegation was told that not only did the majority of voters in Scotland vote to remain within the EU, every county in Scotland voted to remain. In this context, the committee produced its first report in January 2017, entitled Brexit: What Scotland Thinks. The committee has since produced other reports: EU migration and EU Citizen Rights draws some parallels to Canada’s experience with immigration policy (ie., through agreements with the federal government, provinces and territories have some powers to select immigrants to meet regional needs); and Determining Scotland’s Future Relationship with the European Union. Ms. McAlpine indicated that another report will be issued soon focussing on trade and Scotland’s strong preference to remain in the single market.

C. Meeting with the Presiding Officer

Delegates were privileged to have an unscheduled but brief meeting with the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament, Ken Macintosh. He informed delegates that the Brexit vote has resulted in a period of “constitutional upheaval” which nobody can say for sure will be resolved in the near future. Mr. Macintosh summarized the short history of the Scottish Parliament, consisting only of five sessions, the first two being coalition governments, followed by a minority Scottish National Party (SNP) government, a majority SNP and the current minority SNP. He indicated that because the Scottish Parliament is not a bicameral, or two-chamber, parliament, the Scottish Parliament looks to the work of committees instead to provide checks and balances and to hold Parliament to account.

D. Meeting with Assistant Chief Executive of the Scottish Parliament

The delegation met with Ken Hughes, Assistant Chief Executive of the Scottish Parliament, who provided some detail on legislative changes that may be required when the U.K. withdraws from the EU. Mr. Hughes explained that he leads a team that is responsible for examining possible scenarios and outcomes and to determine what the implications of Brexit may be for parliamentary scrutiny. Mr. Hughes will also be responsible for identifying the three categories of subordinate legislation (authority given to Ministers to make legislation) following Brexit, which are 1) existing subordinate legislation that can be transposed; 2) existing subordinate legislation that cannot be transposed; and 3) new subordinate legislation that needs to be drafted. He suggested that it is difficult at this time to assess these categories because Westminster is not being clear about which matters, for which it acquires authority following Brexit, will in turn be devolved and which ones will remain reserved.

Members of the delegations were also told that Scotland will not be representing its own interests during Brexit negotiations. Rather, the negotiations will be handled by Westminster and Mr. Hughes indicated that only 10% of the negotiations are expected to reflect Scottish interests.

E. Meeting with a Representative of the Scottish Government, International Relations

The delegation met with Edward Thomson representing the Scottish Government’s International Framework and its Canada Engagement Strategy. Mr. Thomson described the Scottish Government’s International Affairs Directorate of 70–80 people as having its largest contingent in Brussels but that it also operates from 25 Scottish Development International offices worldwide, including a small presence in Toronto as its Canadian representation. He explained that the work of the International Affairs Directorate is the internationalization of the Scottish Government, which it implements through Scotland’s Economic Strategy, issued in March 2015. This global strategy set out general priorities for Scotland, one of which is internationalization.

The delegates were told that the internationalization priority described in Scotland’s Economic Strategy involves the development of country-specific strategies. In this regard, Scotland has had an engagement plan for Canada for seven or eight years. Recently updated in December 2016, the Canada Engagement Strategy sets out three broad strategic objectives: 1) maintain a global outlook to encourage business, investment, exports and the flow of talent and knowledge with Canada; 2) establish connections with other countries through partnerships; and 3) use advertising and other public relations tools to promote the attractiveness and reputation of Scotland in Canada. Mr. Thomson indicated that under this strategy, memoranda of understanding have been established with some provinces in the areas of energy and renewable power as well as space technologies. As well, ongoing partnerships between Scotland and Canada have facilitated management of festivals and other events and provided platforms for companies to scout talent.

F. Meeting with the European Parliament Information Office in Edinburgh

Per Johansson, the Head of Office for the European Parliament (EP) Information Office in Edinburgh met with delegates to describe the function of the Information Office and the role of the EP in Brexit. Mr. Johansson explained that the EP has information offices in all member states as well as six additional antenna offices including in Scotland and Northern Ireland. He described the work of the offices as being “jack of all trades” by contributing to a variety of issues, such as assisting Members of the European Parliament to organize events, organizing press briefings to keep the media informed of EP activities, providing educational materials to the public, teachers and educational organizations, working with stakeholders who have an interest in European affairs, and acting as an embassy in Scotland to liaise with the Scottish government.

In terms of the EP’s role in Brexit, Mr. Johansson explained that in practical terms, not much has changed to date and that EU law continues to apply in the U.K. He described Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union as merely procedural and containing no substantive text, leading to the uncertainty that the delegation heard about repeatedly during the visit. Invoking Article 50, Mr. Johansson explained, triggers the two-year deadline during which negotiations between the U.K. and the EU must establish the terms of the U.K.’s exit from the EU as well as the terms of the future relationship between the two jurisdictions. Delegates were told that if there is no agreement within the two-year timeframe, then the U.K. will exit the EU without a deal. However, he confirmed that the two-year timeframe can be extended if the U.K. and all other members of the EU agree.

G. Meeting with the Associate Director of the Centre on Constitutional Change

Delegates met with Professor Nicola McEwen from the Centre on Constitutional Change, which conducts multi-disciplinary research (in the areas of political science, economics, social policy and constitutional law) on the U.K.’s changing constitutional relationships. Professor McEwen provided some background on Scotland’s 2014 referendum on independence from the U.K., which failed to pass. She described the referendum as having been held in the absence of any particular catalyst, and compared it to Quebec’s 1980 referendum as opposed to the 1995 referendum. She suggested that the SNP held a majority government at the time, but not because of a widespread urge to separate from the U.K. However, the 2014 result (55% voted “no” to the question “Should Scotland be an independent country?” vs. 45% voting “yes”) was close enough to ensure that the issue of independence remained alive.

Delegates heard that Brexit has now changed the dynamics and provided the catalyst to re-visit Scottish independence. Professor McEwen described how recent events have left Scotland’s First Minister with little choice but to consider a second referendum on independence. That is, Scotland has requested, and the U.K. has denied, 1) Scottish influence on the U.K.’s definition of Brexit (“soft Brexit” vs. “hard Brexit”); 2) that the U.K. request that Scotland remain within the EU Single Market; and 3) that Scotland seek independence from the U.K. but remain within the Single Market. However, Professor McEwen emphasized that should the Scottish government hold another referendum, it would want to be sure that the independence vote would win.

Conclusion

The joint delegation of members from the Canada–United Kingdom Inter-Parliamentary Association and the Canada–Europe Parliamentary Association visited the U.K. at a historic time. Over the course of the five days during which delegates attended bilateral meetings, the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill was passed and received Royal Assent; Scotland’s First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, released a statement that she would seek permission from Westminster to hold a second referendum on Scottish independence from the U.K.; the U.K.’s Prime Minister, Theresa May, responded that Westminster would not permit another referendum on Scottish independence at this time; and an announcement was made that Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union would be triggered at the end of March 2017.

It was particularly noted that the U.K. is in a period of considerable uncertainty and that tensions and emotions continue to run high following the Brexit vote. The way forward for both the U.K. and EU includes a host of unknowns and an unprecedented legal maze. Nevertheless, delegates heard repeatedly that the U.K., including Scotland, is determined to maintain close ties with Canada, not only in terms of trade but in public investment, labour mobility, education, tourism and other areas.

Canada, because of its close relationship with the U.K., is in a unique position to provide support to their British colleagues over the next two years. Events will unfold quickly as the U.K. navigates the disputes that will emerge throughout the process of withdrawing from the EU. It would be worthwhile for the Canadian delegation to undertake two trips in the coming year so as to help the U.K. deal with the matters of trade and Scottish independence.

Respectfully submitted,

Frank Baylis, M.P.
Chair of the Canada-United Kingdom Inter-Parliamentary Association