By Wednesday, the Harper government is expected to ratify the Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Act (FIPA).
It's a deal that's been in the works for 18 years but has just recently seemed to raise the ire of opposition MPs, environmentalists and the anti-Harperites.
Environmental advocate David Suzuki wrote this on his Facebook page on Sunday morning.
"The China-Canada trade deal might be the most critical issue of our time. We only have a few days to stop a 31 year term deal that gives China power over Canada's environmental decisions. Now is the time for Canadians to stand together for nature and democracy."
Green Party leader Elizabeth May was on CTV's Question period, over the weekend, and said the deal will threaten Canada's security, sovereignty, and democracy.
And Lead Now, an independent advocacy organization, now has over 60,000 names on anon-line petition asking the government to stop "the most disturbing trade deal in a generation."
Critics of the agreement say that the deal hasn't been debated in the House, that it's not reciprocal and that it would allow Chinese companies to buyout our natural resource sectors.
The most controversial issue, however, seems to be a provision in the treaty that would allow Chinese companies to sue Canadian governments - in front of a third-party arbitrator - if the government does anything that threatens the company's profits.
The government, not surprisingly, sees things a little differently.
"What we have done effectively is we have established a clear set of rules under which investment will take place and a clear set of rules under which investment will take place and a clear set of rules under which dispute resolution takes place,"International trade minister Ed Fast said while on CTV.
"It gives Canadian investors much greater confidence when they're investing in China. Because as we know China has a somewhat opaque legal and regulatory system," he said adding that the deal does provide full reciprocity.
"We want to make sure there's a set of rules that they can depend on going forward and that will provide an incentive for them to actually invest in China and thereby drive economic growth and prosperity here at home."
Fast also argues that the dispute resolution mechanism in the China deal is not dissimilar to the process in 24 other investment and promotion deals already entered into by Canadian governments.
But May, and others, say that this isn't a typical deal with a typical country.
"If you look at Sinopec, the Chinese state-owned oil company, it's the fifth-largest corporation on earth," she said.
"You don't have a private sector company seeking damages against Canada for something that they say was arbitrary under one of these investor state provisions. You've got the government of China telling the government of Canada that either federally or provincially or municipally, one level of government in Canada has done something which interferes with their expectation of profits."
[ More Political Points: Liberal MP wants to encourage domestic travel by plane, train and bus with tax credits ]
On Monday afternoon, May asked for and was denied an emergency debate about FIPA in the House.
She later wrote this Tweet:
— Elizabeth May MP (@ElizabethMay) October 29, 2012
May, Suzuki and their cohorts better 'hope' for a miracle.