Bill S-5 (Historical)

Ensuring Safe Vehicles Imported from Mexico for Canadians Act

An Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999

This enactment amends the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 to allow, subject to certain conditions, the importation of certain used vehicles from Mexico in order for Canada to meet its free trade obligations.

Ensuring Safe Vehicles Imported from Mexico for Canadians Act

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Minister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas)]

moved that Bill S-5, An Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to present an amendment to change both the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. These changes are being proposed in order to bring Canada into compliance with the automotive provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement, known as NAFTA. These amendments will address the importation of used vehicles from Mexico in a manner that continues to both preserve the safety of Canadians and to protect our precious environment.

Although the North American Free Trade Agreement was signed in 1993, its provisions on the importation of used vehicles only came into effect on January 1, 2009. These provisions require that Mexico, the United States and Canada allow the importation of used vehicles from one another's countries. The requirement is to be implemented in a phased manner by each of the countries. The allowable importations will start with vehicles that are 10 years old and older. The age threshold for the vehicles will decrease by two years, every two years, until 2019 when countries may not adopt or maintain a prohibition or restriction on imports of used vehicles from each other.

The current wording of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act does not allow for this importation.

The Motor Vehicle Safety Act is the key enabling legislative tool that regulates the manufacture and importation of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment in order to reduce the risk of death, injury and damage to property and to the environment. It is the tool that the government uses to provide direction to manufacturers, to importers and to the general public, thus allowing us to work together to continually increase the level of road safety in Canada.

This act sets out a comprehensive minimum safety standard for vehicles manufactured or imported for use into Canada. It also sets the standards for new tires and for equipment used in the restraint of children and disabled persons within the vehicle. The Motor Vehicle Safety Act first came into effect in 1971, and was last amended in 1993.

The Motor Vehicle Safety Act enables the development of the motor vehicle safety regulations and the Canada motor vehicle safety standards. These regulations and standards help to ensure the current and the ongoing safety of Canadians on our roadways.

The Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, came into force on March 31, 2000, following an extensive parliamentary review of the original l988 act. The Canadian Environment Protection Act, 1999 is the government's principal legislative tool to prevent pollution in order to protect the environment and human health. It provides a comprehensive approach to reducing harmful emissions from vehicles and equipment by considering vehicles, engines and fuels as integrated systems.

Even with a modern, efficient piece of legislation such as the Canadian Environment Protection Act, 1999, amendments are required from time to time to keep pace with various international commitments, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement. We believe it is important to move swiftly to meet our international commitments and to be compliant with the North American Free Trade Agreement. We believe it is also essential to demonstrate our continued good faith and to maintain our reputation with our trading partners.

Both the United States and Mexico have regimes in place that allow for the importation of these used vehicles.

Prior to the automotive provision of the North American Free Trade Agreement coming into force, the American government already had a program where it considered requests for importation of vehicles from other countries. A determination is made for each individual vehicle to see if it can be modified to meet American safety standards; therefore, its rules did not need to change in order to meet the North American Free Trade Agreement requirements.

On December 22, 2008, the President of Mexico issued a decree allowing for the duty-free entry of used light and heavy-duty weight vehicles from Canada and the United States that are 10 years old or older into Mexico. This decree entered into force on January 1, 2009.

I think all members of the House recognize the importance for Canada to meet its reciprocal obligations. Making these changes to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 will help to fulfill these commitments to our trading partner.

While there has not been a free trade challenge from Mexico so far, if we do not proceed with these changes, it raises the possibility of a challenge arising, as well as other retaliatory trade actions.

As such, I am proposing today that the Motor Vehicle Safety Act be amended to allow the importation of used vehicles from Mexico. This importation would be contingent on the condition that the vehicles can be modified to meet the Canadian safety and emission standards.

Vehicles imported for use in Canada that are 15 years old or older are not required to meet safety or emissions standards. These older vehicles have essentially been collectors' items, falling into the vintage vehicle category. Currently, under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, for vehicles that are less than 15 years old, only those from the United States may be imported.

Subsection 7(2) of the current Motor Vehicle Safety Act allows for the importation of used vehicles purchased in the United States. We are proposing to modify it to include the importation of used vehicles from Mexico.

Changes to those subsections would also require that within a prescribed period the vehicle must be made to conform to the safety requirements and that it be inspected in accordance with our regulations. Finally, a condition would set out that before the vehicle is presented for licensing under the laws of any province, the vehicle would be certified in accordance with the regulations to so conform by any person who is designated by the regulations.

Our proposal also includes changes to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act with respect to the definition of “vehicle”. Currently the definition states:

any vehicle that is capable of being driven or drawn on roads by any means other than muscular power exclusively, but does not include any vehicle designed to run exclusively on rails.

This definition would change to “any vehicle that belongs to a prescribed class of vehicles”.

The purpose of this change would be to more closely align the definition in the Motor Vehicle Safety Act with that in the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. This change would be necessary since both acts regulate the automotive industry and the difference in the definition of vehicles could lead to confusion for the industry.

These amendments would increase choice for Canadian consumers by providing them additional importation options of specified used vehicles from Mexico. The modifications would also maintain the continued safety of the Canadian public by ensuring the timely modification of the vehicles to comply with Canadian motor vehicle safety standards, thereby ensuring the safety of the Canadian public.

I must emphasize that the safety of Canadians and all people travelling on Canadian roadways remains our first priority. While on the surface it may seem harmless to allow individuals to import non-conforming vehicles, it nevertheless has an incremental impact on the safety of other Canadian road users.

Canada has different driving conditions than other parts of the world, including Mexico. As such, our safety standards are developed to meet our own needs, while still harmonizing where appropriate. For example, our vehicles have a requirement for daytime running lights to deal with lower lighting levels in the winter, our speedometers need to measure vehicle speed in kilometres, and the mechanism to attach child restraints to the vehicle is stronger than required in most other countries except in the U.S.

Canadian vehicle safety standards are designed to minimize, to the extent reasonably possible, the risk of death, injury or collision resulting from vehicles and their use. While they may be similar, and in fact are frequently harmonized with those of the United States, Canadian standards reflect the unique circumstances of Canada.

The safety of Canadians remains paramount to the Government of Canada. As such, stringent requirements would be put in place to ensure that the safety of Mexican imported vehicles is equivalent to that provided by vehicles sold in Canada. The imported Mexican vehicles would be required to meet either the Canadian or American safety standards that were in place at the time of manufacture.

In 1995, in order to monitor and regulate the importation of vehicles from the United States, Transport Canada established the registrar of imported vehicles, under the purview of the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement. This importation process ensures that vehicles purchased by Canadians at the retail level in the United States are made fully compliant with the Canadian federal vehicle safety requirements before these vehicles are presented for provincial and territorial licensing.

The registrar of imported vehicles is operated by a private contractor and is funded on a cost-recovery basis through fees charged to Canadian importers. In 2009, 124,000 used vehicles were imported into Canada from the United States.

In order to ensure that vehicle imports from Mexico meet Canadian safety requirements, the current registrar of imported vehicles program will be extended to cover those vehicles. This extension will not impose any additional cost on the Canadian taxpayer, given the cost-recovery system of the registrar.

The Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 and its regulations allow the importation of used vehicles into Canada from the United States provided they meet Canadian or United States standards at the time of their manufacture. Amendments are required to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 to provide the authority to develop regulations to address the importation of used vehicles from Mexico that are not compliant with Canadian standards at the time of their importation. These regulations will be developed with respect to North American free trade obligations, and any vehicles imported into Canada from Mexico will be required to be modified in compliance with the Canadian emission standards.

The amended Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 provisions will allow the importation of used vehicles from Mexico that are not compliant with Canadian standards. However, the person importing the vehicle will need to make a declaration stating that the vehicle will be made to comply with the requirements, that an inspection will be carried out if required, and that the vehicle will be certified before it is presented for licensing.

As such, the revisions to the act will maintain Canadian environmental standards and not result in higher emissions than if the vehicles had originally been manufactured to those standards.

To ensure that used cars arriving from Mexico respect the emissions standards of Canada, an implementation program will be put in place. It will be consistent with the one put in place by Transport Canada and could include steps such as the review of supporting documents and inspections of imported vehicles.

As part of the regulatory process, consultations with stakeholders will be undertaken on the development of regulations allowing the importation of used vehicles from Mexico.

It should be noted that it is estimated that a minimum of one year to a maximum of two years after proclamation will also be needed to design the regulations and an implementation program under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. I would note as important information that imported used vehicles from the United States meet Canadian environmental emissions standards because Canadian emissions standards are harmonized with those of the United States. As such, vehicles that comply with U.S. standards also comply with Canadian standards. Imported American vehicles bear the United States emissions control label.

Consultations on changes to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act started in 2002, with the release of a discussion paper. A range of potential changes to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act have been examined over the years, and the act is currently being assessed against today's operating environment.

However, given that we are not currently compliant with the North American Free Trade Agreement, we believe we should start with addressing this potential trade issue in advance of any other challenges. This will bring us into compliance with the North American Free Trade Agreement and avoid the possibility of a challenge by the Government of Mexico.

We have also consulted provincial and territorial governments, given that the imported vehicles will be licensed and operated in Canada. I would note that they did not express any concerns. In addition, commercial importers are supportive of the proposed changes.

I would also note that we continue to monitor the current United States Senate and House proposals to change the United States' motor vehicle safety act.

In conclusion, we believe these modifications to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 are crucial to maintaining our obligations under the North American Free Trade Agreement, our goodwill with our trading partner, and our broader international trade reputation.

The impact of imported vehicles from Mexico should not have an effect on the Canadian manufacturing and retail market as the importations would be for used vehicles and, to start with, permit only the entry of older used vehicles.

These changes would be implemented in a manner that would maintain the safety of Canadians on our roadways by ensuring that imported used vehicles from Mexico meet our Canadian safety standards.

In addition, these changes would continue to protect our environment by ensuring that used imported vehicles from Mexico respect our emissions standards.

These amendments are the proper thing to do. They would maintain our trade relationships, have potential benefits for Canadians and continue to protect our safety and environmental interests.

I call on my fellow parliamentarians to support this bill unanimously.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the speech made by the hon. Minister of State of Foreign Affairs . He mentioned that this bill was due in 2009. We will be entering 2011 shortly. It seems like this delay has been caused either by the incompetence of the current government or by it being carried away by playing politics in Parliament with other stuff than the stuff that is equally important on the international stage, which should have been taken care of.

I would ask the member whether it was due to incompetence or is the government playing politics here in the House?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, certainly there was incompetence in this House and in the Government of Canada between the years 1999 and 2006.

However, I think the simple answer is that it was not required until now. There have been consultations, there have been studies and there have been considerations. The government, our government, feels that the time is now right to properly bring Canadian safety standards and environmental standards into full compliance with NAFTA.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the member says that he has consulted with the importers and they do not have a problem with it. That is no big surprise. The people who are importing the cars would like to import more vehicles from wherever they can get them. The question is, has he talked to the motor dealers organizations in the country?

He says he talked to the provinces and they do not seem to have a problem with it. However, I can tell members that in my home city of Winnipeg, only a year ago, we had a situation, and I do not know if the member is familiar with this, concerning the lemon law. There have been lemon law schemes in the United States now going back 20 years to aid the consumer. If a consumer buys a lemon, the manufacturer has four attempts to correct the problem. If the manufacturer cannot correct the problem, the car is bought back.

What we found happening is car companies were reselling these lemons that they had to buy back in different states. This is an arrangement within the United States and Canada. So I do not know he is going to be able to track these things.

The other question I have for him is, does he have any idea of how many cars we are talking about here? It is my guess that it would be almost negligible because we are talking about used vehicles that are 10 years old and older.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague does raise a number of important considerations. However, he also answers his original question by noting that, as this will be phased in, it only does affect vehicles 10 years old or older. The number, as I referenced, with regard to current practice of used vehicles from the United States being imported into Canada, was a relatively small number compared with the number of new vehicles sold in this country.

So, yes, we have consulted extensively with the provinces, the territories, and the importers and we see no significant or negative impact on the Canadian auto industry.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I was interested to hear my hon. colleague talk about safety on our highways. I have a private member's bill that deals with just that for heavy duty equipment to have side guards. I hope he gives consideration to that.

I understand that this is an amendment that is required in order to bring Canada into compliance with international trade obligations under NAFTA and that how they are going to proceed with this to ensure safety on Canadian roads is that there will have to be compliance before they allow registration.

My question to the hon. member is, how is this going to be monitored? Registration is a provincial issue. Are there additional costs that are going to be borne by the provinces to ensure compliance? How is the federal government going to ensure that it is monitoring the situation?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I explained in debate, the registrar, which currently operates a cost recovery system with regard to used American vehicles being imported into Canada, will apply a very similar inspection compliance regime and cost recovery system so that there will be no negative impact on the Canadian taxpayer.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the member would know that odometer rollback and replacement is basically theft and a form of fraud on the Canadian public. It is widespread and has been for years. We cannot even handle the issue in Canada. Cars with spun odometers are coming into the Manitoba market from Ontario and Quebec. It was only a dozen years ago that the provincial government brought in a tracking system and a history book that has to follow the car to establish its age and follow it through ownership changes. It has not really solved the problem of people replacing odometers. Spinning them is one thing but they are being replaced.

How are we going to police something like that if a vehicle comes in from another country like Mexico or even the United States when we cannot even deal with the problem on an interprovincial basis right here in Canada?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the point that we have to make is that it is time for Canada to meet its commitments under the North American Free Trade Agreement, to become compliant with our other two trading partners. We have to recognize that in doing that, Mexico has very limited safety standards. These standards do not require safety provisions that vehicles on Canadian highways and byways must comply with. These imported used vehicles from Mexico will be made to comply to either Canadian or American safety standards as they now apply to used vehicles imported from the United States.

The Mexican vehicle population does include some vehicles today that are certified to U.S. safety and environmental standards and it is expected that this class of vehicles will be relatively easily adapted to meet Canadian regulations and provisions to be compliant. This process, which is already in place for used vehicles imported from the United States, will apply equally effectively to used vehicles from Mexico.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister mentioned that this will be phased over 10 years until 2019. The critics of this bill, my constituents and other Canadians, are asking questions. They think the bill will overwhelm our used car market.

Would the minister like to comment on this question that was raised by my constituents?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, when this legislation is passed we will turn to writing the specific regulations that will apply.

The member is quite right in remarking that it will initially apply only to vehicles 10 years or older and then every two years that will decrease until 2019. By that time we believe we will have brought the regulations into compliance with no adverse or negative impact on the Canadian used car market. It will ensure the safety of those who use Canadian highways and byways.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. Minister of State of Foreign Affairs for the Americas for bringing this to the attention of the House and to Canadians. On the same lines, I rise today to speak about Bill S-5, Ensuring Safe Vehicles Imported from Mexico for Canadians Act.

I will admit that this is one of the more mundane issues that I and my fellow members are asked to speak on as part of our daily debates in the House, but the utility in the bill is very clear both in terms of our country's international trade obligations and the safety of our citizens.

In fact, even though Bill S-5 is described as updating laws to comply with NAFTA, I would argue that Bill S-5 is about putting the interests of Canadians first.

When it comes to the safety standards that Canada places on cars we are a more strict country than most others in the world. This has meant that many used cars that are being sold at the retail level in other countries do not always meet Canada's safety requirements. However, the United States also has very tough safety standards as the hon. minister mentioned earlier.

In the case of American cars, Canada requires a declaration from the importer that the car will be brought up to regulation before hitting the road. Mexico has been held to a different standard however. It is finally time for Mexican automobiles to be given the same opportunity as American vehicles to be imported into Canada.

Bill S-5 is about treating our free trade partners equally and creating a level playing field within the context of NAFTA. It is also about fulfilling the obligations that we agreed to in this treaty.

Bill S-5 amends the Motor Vehicle Safety Act to allow for Mexico to be brought up to that same treatment. But in doing this, it is important that Canada does not compromise its own standards, particularly when it comes to the safety of our citizens. This is how we arrive at Bill S-5 today.

NAFTA has created jobs, growth and a sense of internationalism between our three countries and it is important that we continue to show respect for the parameters we signed onto in 1993. This is the evolution of this trade agreement and it also demonstrates that Canada has the ability to maintain control of the priorities that we hold as important.

The first aspect of the bill is ensuring that vehicles are ready for the road and that they present no undue risk to Canadians. The second aspect of the bill has to do with ensuring these vehicles present no undue risk to the environment. I come from the riding of Newton—North Delta. In the backyard of my riding we have the Burns Bog. The citizens of my riding bring questions on the environment to me. On this particular issue there are the same questions that will be asked. I can assure them that if we are going to be allowing Mexican vehicles into this country based on a mere declaration, the act must be amended to allow for such a privilege, where we make sure that those safety standards and the environmental standards are up to speed and meet Canadian requirements.

The mechanics of the bill are far from exciting. These are the technical details that allow Canada to live up to our international obligations to ensure that NAFTA continues to propel the three partners forward.

Ultimately, as members of Parliament we have a more important obligation to our constituents. We have an obligation, as I mentioned earlier, to ensure that our roads are safe and that vehicles do not present a risk to drivers on the road. We also have an obligation to ensure that our environment be considered for our own health and for the health of future generations.

I would like to conclude with how an elementary issue such as this has been handled by the government. After taking two full years, and five full years into government, the Conservative government is finally realizing that we should fulfill our obligations.

Canada has had a commitment under NAFTA to our partner in Mexico since 1993 to change our laws and allow used Mexican cars. We were supposed to do it in 2009, as the hon. minister mentioned earlier, but here we are at the end of 2010 and it is still not done. Once again, this is a bill that was pushed aside because of prorogation and the government playing political games with the nation's agenda.

Canadians are tired of a government that looks at every issue as a means to achieve a political advantage. With the government, it is all the same, regardless of whether the issue is a major plank in its policy platform or a technical yet necessary bill like Bill S-5.

If Canadians wonder why the House seems so prone to dysfunction, they only need to look across at the tactics of the government to understand why.

It is time we put the priorities of the country first above all other considerations. I am glad that Bill S-5 was brought forward and that we will meet our international obligations. At the same time, we will ensure that Canadian drivers and occupants of vehicles are safe. Also, we want to ensure we protect the environmental standard for generations to come as they should be able to enjoy a better and cleaner environment.

I recommend that Bill S-5 be passed for second reading for due diligence. I look forward to ensuring that we as a country live up to our international obligations.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely right, Bill S-5 will make Canada comply with NAFTA obligations to allow imports of used vehicles from Mexico, which already exists between the U.S. and Canada. However, right now vehicles from Mexico must be adapted to Canadian safety and emissions standards before being accorded into Canada.

The question becomes an issue with the importers. I was trying to ask the parliamentary secretary about this. I would bet that he has not consulted with a single motor dealer association member in the country on this issue. However, I can see a lot of problems with curbers. I am sure he knows the term, “curber”, and they are a big problem for motor dealer organizations in our country.

I think we will see a lot of abuse with curbers importing vehicles from Mexico with replaced odometer, spun odometers. I do not know what sort of regulations can be brought in force to stop it, but to me that is the exposure.

Overall, in terms of the general market, I really do not think there will be a lot of vehicles involved. I do not think we will see a lot of 10-year-old used Mexican vehicles brought up to Canadian standards and imported into Canada. I think it would be importers and curbers doing this type of activity.

Could the member comment on that.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Elmwood—Transcona on the work that he has done on the bill. As responsible representatives of our constituents, we are here to raise questions like those that the hon. member raised.

When the bill goes to the next stage, those questions must be answered by the government and the minister responsible so we are able to regulate inspectors there and have the process in place.

There will always be people who try to play with the system. We have to ensure there are strict regulations with a process in place to deal with those individuals, even though not many will be caught, as the hon. member mentioned. However, it will create more work for mechanics because we have the highest safety and environmental standards.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the reality is we are dealing with Mexican vehicles that are 10 years old and older in a country with not as good a road structure as we have here. These vehicles will have to be upgraded to Canadian environmental standards and other standards that we require, which will be a barrier to much activity there. Also, there is the cost of transportation.

Transportation is a big issue. Even when bringing American cars here, the transportation costs are quite high.

If we are talking about importing cars from Mexico that are over 10 years old, I really do not see a market here at all except if one can buy the car cheap enough and then pay all those costs, one might find someone to buy it in Canada. People are not going to be able to do that unless they make the cars look a lot newer than it really are.

I suggest we talk to the motor dealers association of Canada. My guess is the government has not talked to anyone in the association. Perhaps when the bill goes to committee, we will have to send letters out to those dealers ourselves to get them involved so the government can hear their testimony.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, that is what I mentioned earlier. It is the duty of the government to ensure that it reaches out to the stakeholders and ensure those issues are enshrined and put in legislation. As the hon. member said, there will not be many cars coming into Canada.

This is why the bill is nothing but a technical aspect of the three country agreement, NAFTA. As an obligation, we have to ensure we are able to live with it and we are able to pass on the legislation to be in line with NAFTA.

In 2009 we had to bring in the bill as an obligation on the international scene. We are bringing it in two years later so it is not going to impact the market, or the environment or the safety of Canadians negatively.

I encourage the hon. member from Elmwood—Transcona to support the bill and let us carry on with some of the other important business that we can bring before the House.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to much of the debate and thought perhaps my friend from Elmwood—Transcona could use a break to refresh himself with some water as he goes over the text of the bill a bit further.

I come from a riding where there is a lot of automobile manufacturing. The member for Elmwood—Transcona was saying earlier that this bill would allow curbsiders. He was really worried about the justice implications. It is good to see that once in a while the member talks about justice issues.

I am wondering if the hon. member would help us. He said that he was supporting this legislation. He knows the government constantly reaches out to people across the country and encourages as much debate on the issues as possible before we bring legislation forward.

Could the hon. member help us in reaching out to his coalition partners to ensure we get this legislation passed so we can show that Canada is a place to invest in, where people can feel good about bringing their dollars and where we always live up to the obligations we have with our partners, internationally and at home?

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, one thing I would not agree with is on the coalition. If we look back to 2005, when the election was called, I could see the coalition always changing. The Conservatives formed a coalition sometimes with the NDPers and at other times it formed a coalition with the Bloc. It is whatever suits the government.

When it comes to creating a market for Canada, the Liberals have always been fair when it came to free trade and when it came to creating opportunities for our young people on the international scene. That is how we will go forward to the future.

The record shows, whether it is on innovation, or free trade or opening up relations with other nations to create those opportunities, we have always been there and we will be there in the years to come.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

It is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the question to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment is as follows: the hon. member for Beauharnois—Salaberry, Border Crossings.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Richmond—Arthabaska.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in the debate on Bill S-5. First of all, I will say that this will likely not be my longest speech in the six years that I have been sitting here in the House of Commons, because the Bloc Québécois believes that the bill is merely a formality and that Canada must fulfill its obligations under NAFTA, which was signed by Canada, the United States and Mexico.

So, as I just mentioned, Bill S-5, An Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, is just a formality. Under NAFTA, we must accept the importation of used vehicles from Mexico. Of course, we must ensure that these used vehicles comply with our environmental and safety standards. Earlier, the minister of state mentioned regulations that will be adopted soon, or as quickly as possible, I hope, before these vehicles cross the border into Canada.

The government says that it has consulted Quebec, the provinces and the territories, which have to be consulted because Quebec and the provinces are responsible for licensing vehicles. Members of the Bloc Québécois have not heard of any particular concerns on the part of the Government of Quebec about this bill because Quebec agrees with NAFTA and agrees that the government should fulfill its obligations. That is what the Government of Canada has to do with Bill S-5. It should have been done before now. This is not the first time the government has taken more time than expected with certain legislation. No doubt this is because it spends more time thinking about elections or proroguing Parliament. Those are definitely the kinds of things that could have ended up delaying the bill before us today.

The minister of state may have been feeling optimistic, or he may even have been wearing his rose-coloured glasses, when he said that this bill would benefit people. That is a bit of an exaggeration. I do not see what is so beneficial about fulfilling our obligations with respect to a free trade agreement. In a way, it may benefit consumers by opening up the used vehicle market. Cars from Mexico—except those near the sea that get corroded because of the salt—have not gone through the harsh winters we have here in Quebec and Canada, or even in the northern United States. That means that some cars, while they may be older, may be rust-free. However, as I said, cars used near the sea may have body rust from the salt.

I am not an expert, but like many people, I have bought cars. Younger people especially tend to buy used cars. Early in my career, when I was just out of university, I, too, drove cars that might be called clunkers, but they were in decent shape and not a public menace.

The first thing that must be done is a proper inspection of the vehicle's engine and body. Although some vehicles may be of interest, I do not really expect that we will be faced with a huge influx of used cars from Mexico. What we must do is ensure that clear and strict environmental regulations are adopted. The general state of these vehicles and their polluting emissions must be very carefully checked so that people do not find themselves with vehicles that are a hazard to health or to the safety of other road users. When I speak of road users, I am referring not only to the driver and passengers of the vehicle in question, but also to the other people sharing the road with them and, of course, pedestrians.

The government therefore has an obligation to ensure that these vehicles meet all the required standards. We must now face the fact that, under the agreement, used vehicles from Mexico can cross our border, just like vehicles from the United States. A free trade agreement goes both ways. If our vehicles can cross the border to be sold, then American and Mexican vehicles must be allowed to cross into Canada for the same purpose.

The Bloc Québécois thus supports Bill S-5, the main purpose of which is to comply with obligations under NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, regarding the importation of used vehicles from Mexico.

Used vehicles imported from Mexico will have to meet Canadian emissions standards and be in generally good condition in order to be brought into Canada. Accordingly, this does not mean reduced standards in Canada. Individuals who wish to sell vehicles here will have to comply with very strict standards and regulations.

The bill also requires compliance with standards regarding harmful emissions and safety. We realize how dangerous it is to have unsafe vehicles on the road. We are enacting more and more regulations in that regard, such as the regulations on winter tires, for instance. In Quebec, it is now mandatory that all vehicles have winter tires as of December 15. That date is fast approaching, so the public should take notice.

Bills concerning harmful emissions are also being studied. Vehicles on the road can become a little older, especially in times of economic crisis. People think twice before getting a new car. There is no problem with having a car that is a little older, as long as it is well maintained and properly equipped in terms of safety.

Given that Canada could face sanctions for prolonged non-compliance with NAFTA obligations, our domestic legislation should reflect those obligations as soon as possible, since Mexico could indeed impose sanctions on Canada. There is some good news, however: the minister of state said earlier that no sanctions have been imposed so far. As my hon. Liberal colleague just said, I think the members of the House have no choice but to support Bill S-5.

The main objective of this bill is to ensure that we comply with a NAFTA provision that is being phased in. Canada is behind by nearly a year, since we were supposed to comply with it by January 1, 2009. Knowing that we have a bill that is very likely to pass and come into force, Mexico might play nicely and decide not to make any trouble for Canada, but it could still impose sanctions.

Until recently, Appendix 300-A.1 of NAFTA allowed Canada to prohibit imports of used Mexican cars, but there was also a provision whereby Canada would eventually have to accept used vehicles from Mexico. This restriction will be phased out, as the wording in the fourth paragraph of the appendix indicates.

According to the wording, Canada must allow imports of used vehicles from Mexico that are at least 10 years old beginning January 1, 2009. Then Canada has to allow imports of newer vehicles—those that are at least eight years old—beginning January 1, 2011, then those that are at least six years old beginning January 1, 2013, and so on until all used vehicles are allowed to be imported beginning January 1, 2019.

Bill S-5 amends the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, which both govern the use and importation of used vehicles from the United States, but not from Mexico. We have to amend these acts, which affected only the market for used vehicles from the United States.

In the amendments, Mexican cars have been added and described as “prescribed vehicles” since the phasing in of the NAFTA appendix allows Canada to regulate this import by restricting the age of the cars imported. In all cases, the used American or Mexican cars will have to comply with the requirements set by Canada on emissions and overall state of repair.

Failure to comply with NAFTA could result in economic retaliation by Mexico and therefore it is preferable that we conform to NAFTA quickly.

I will close by giving some details from paragraph 4 of NAFTA Appendix 300-A.1, which I just mentioned. It is very clear. Concerning used vehicles, it says:

4. Canada may adopt or maintain prohibitions or restrictions on imports of used vehicles from the territory of Mexico, except as follows:

(a) beginning January 1, 2009, Canada may not adopt or maintain a prohibition or restriction on imports from the territory of Mexico of originating used vehicles that are at least 10 years old;

(b) beginning January 1, 2011, Canada may not adopt or maintain a prohibition or restriction on imports from the territory of Mexico of originating used vehicles that are at least eight years old;

(c) beginning January 1, 2013, Canada may not adopt or maintain a prohibition or restriction on imports from the territory of Mexico of originating used vehicles that are at least six years old;

(d) beginning January 1, 2015, Canada may not adopt or maintain a prohibition or restriction on imports from the territory of Mexico of originating used vehicles that are at least four years old;

(e) beginning January 1, 2017, Canada may not adopt or maintain a prohibition or restriction on imports from the territory of Mexico of originating used vehicles that are at least two years old; and

(f) beginning January 1, 2019, Canada may not adopt or maintain a prohibition or restriction on imports from the territory of Mexico of originating used vehicles.

So there will no longer be limits regarding the age of the automobile. This bill will allow us to respect the agreement signed with the United States and Mexico. All of these measures were set out in Appendix 300-A.1 of NAFTA.

We want to ensure—and I am repeating this because it is very important—that we are respecting the regulations, which will be very strict. These regulations will apply to vehicles and how well they work, as well as their overall condition so that we do not end up with dangerous vehicles. They will also apply to the vehicles' emissions because these automobiles will be fairly old to begin with: 10 years or older, then 8 years or older, and then 6 years or older.

Consequently, we must ensure that the standards established in Canada for our automobiles and for vehicles coming from the United States are respected, even if these vehicles are imported from Mexico. We must not end up with vehicles that pollute. That would be unfortunate and damaging to our environment.

I ask everyone in the House to vote in favour of Bill S-5 so that we will be complying with NAFTA. The Bloc Québécois will monitor the regulations to ensure that these vehicles comply as they should.

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my dear colleague mentioned a deadline of January 1, 2009. I would like to know what he thinks caused the delay.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her question. There could be a number of hypotheses here. However, as is the case with many bills that the government claims to want to pass through the House quickly, in many instances it was responsible for this because we had prorogations and elections even though the Prime Minister had promised that there would be fixed election dates. This ended up stalling a number of pieces of legislation.

I imagine that this bill was not a priority for the government, except that perhaps someone woke up and realized that we had signed an agreement with Mexico through NAFTA. For almost a year now, Mexico has been entitled to impose sanctions on Canada since we are not currently complying with the provisions of Appendix 300-A.1. The appendix clearly states that Canada must start to accept importations of used vehicles from Mexico.

Now that the government has woken up and realized that sanctions are possible, it wants to hurry up. There is no reason to be against this, but in many cases, with many bills that have been introduced, the Conservatives have no one to blame but themselves.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, we are looking at vehicles that are 10 years of age and older. If we look at the book value of 10-year-old vehicles, I really cannot see where we could be looking at more than $2,000 or slightly more for these types of vehicles. Therefore, I really do not see this as a huge problem. I know we need to pass the bill to be in compliance with the trade deals, and the NDP will support it going to committee, but I really cannot see where the market will be.

As we move forward over the next nine years, we are removing prohibitions on new vehicles and in another 10 years, 2019, when we can import vehicles that are one year old from Mexico then I can see potential problems.

The member talked about snow tire requirements in Quebec. The installation of immobilizers is mandatory in Manitoba. People cannot drive cars in Manitoba without immobilizers. To me, there are too many requirements to allow bringing 10-year-old cars and older to Canada in any great numbers a viable option.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I thank the member for his intervention. He has already spoken on this subject a few times since the debate on Bill S-5 began, and I listened carefully to his concerns, which I share, I might add. However, regarding some of the points he raised, this might not be the right forum, because in this case, it is merely a question of complying with NAFTA.

Regarding the used car market, I agree with the member in that I also do not expect our market to be flooded with used vehicles from Mexico. It is extremely important to bear in mind that the government has an obligation in all of this to ensure that strict regulations regarding the general state of repair of these vehicles and their harmful emissions are obeyed—which is what we want and will keep a close eye on.

Beyond that, with respect to winter tires, it is up to consumers to obey the Quebec law. The member mentioned a law in Manitoba. If I understood correctly, his concerns have to do with the immobilizer program, whereby a system is installed in vehicles in order immobilize the vehicle if it is stolen. Clearly, this has more to do with the aftermarket. That is another regulation with which car dealers and used car retailers must comply. In this case, we are talking about complying only with NAFTA, and we have no choice but to comply in order to avoid sanctions.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Bill S-5 was introduced in the Senate on April 14 but this is part of NAFTA and NAFTA was signed approximately two decades ago. I am a little curious as to why this has been brought forward and needs to be passed so quickly when for 20 years it has probably not done anything. It has two sets of regulations that I can see, which are the safety regulations and environmental regulations, CEPA.

If used cars were to come into Canada and garages were to bring them up to standard, does the member not think that it would create jobs for us rather than having the cars dumped somewhere else and let the jobs drain away to somewhere else?

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, some of my colleague's questions might be better answered by the minister of state, who spoke earlier. This is a Conservative government bill, so he should be answering some of her questions.

With respect to garages, of course they want more business inspecting cars. On the other hand, if more used vehicles are coming in from another country, maybe fewer vehicles from here will be sold. There might be some give and take. However, one thing we know for sure is that cars will have to be inspected. In that respect, my colleague is absolutely right. This already applies to heavy vehicles from other provinces and countries. People can even import vehicles from Europe. Those cars just have to comply with our regulations. Obviously, inspections are not performed by government employees in their offices. I mean no disrespect to government employees, but that is not where inspections happen. They happen in garages. So my colleague is right. Still, I do not think that this will create thousands and thousands of jobs.

In answer to her question about why the government is in such a hurry to pass this bill, I should point out that under NAFTA, initially, people were not to start importing used cars 10 years old or older from Mexico until January 1, 2009. So no government dropped the ball, except for the current government, which should have done something about this before 2009. If I am not mistaken, and if I can count, it is now 2010. That is about a year's delay. That is why the government is in such a hurry to pass this legislation.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have two questions for my colleague. First, does he not think there are better standards that could be applied for vehicle emissions that could be utilized?

Second, does he not believe that vehicle emissions standards could be done in a way that would provide better North American standards for our country as well as for the United States and Mexico?

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will respond very quickly. I completely agree with the hon. member. We must be more and more strict in terms of vehicle emissions. As I said in my speech, some provinces, such as Quebec, have been making an effort, but, unfortunately, they have only studied the situation. The legislation has not yet been implemented. We want to start looking seriously at emissions, especially for older vehicles, even if it means taking vehicles off the road if they do not meet the stricter standards. Automobile manufacturers are able to produce vehicles that pollute less, and they have demonstrated that over the years. There is no reason for them to be lax.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today to Bill S-5, a bill coming from the Senate.

Bill S-5 is an Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. Its short title is “ensuring safe vehicles imported from Mexico for Canadians act. It was introduced in the Senate on April 14, 2010. The bill would amend sections of the Motor Vehicles Safety Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, to bring Canada into compliance with its international trade obligations, mainly under NAFTA.

As members know, NAFTA is a multilateral free trade agreement between Canada, the United States and Mexico. Its objectives are to eliminate trade barriers and facilitate cross-border movement of goods and services between the territories of the parties. Furthermore, NAFTA aims to promote fair competition in the free trade area, increase investment opportunities in the territories of the parties and create effective procedures for the agreement's implementation, application, joint administration and for the resolution of disputes.

Several members have already pointed out that this agreement is now two years late. Under the provisions of NAFTA, this particular element of allowing Mexican used cars to be brought into Canada should have occurred back in 2009. As I had indicated, the NDP will be supporting the bill going to committee because we recognize that it simply puts into effect promises that we have already made as a country when we signed into the trade agreements.

However, that does not stop us from having some observations and thoughts about the implementation of what we are approving and what we are signing into now. That will come with the regulations and rules that the government puts into place, as well the consultations, in promulgating the rules and satisfying the concerns of our constituent parts in Canada, like the motor vehicle dealers associations and many other groups in this country.

We look at this situation now and say that it is unlikely that there will be many vehicles being dealt with here. One of the members said that we were trying to hold off a free trade challenge by the Mexicans. and that is part of the equation.

While we do not anticipate a lot of 10-year-old vehicles being imported into Canada under this agreement, the provisions are there to eliminate, on a year-by-year basis over the next nine years, the barriers for newer vehicles. Therefore, in another year from now we will be able to bring in nine-year-old used vehicles. Then it will be eight, then seven and, by 2019, we will be able to bring in all used vehicles. When that happens, that may prove to be a much bigger group of vehicles when we are talking about one, two or three-year-old vehicles. The residual value of those newer vehicles would be much higher than a 10-year-old vehicle would be.

When the cost of upgrading all the safety features that need to be done, the immobilizers in the case of Manitoba and the very expensive cost of transportation from Mexico for used cars is added on, importing a 10-year-old vehicle might not make a lot of sense. When we get to one or two-year-old vehicles, especially high-value vehicles, it may become economically viable for importers to start bringing in vehicles on a fairly large scale.

Whether that creates jobs in Canada or not is really beside the point, because as the members have pointed out, this is part of our trade obligations. It is simply one of the implementation procedures of our trade agreement.

NAFTA, like all free trade agreements, establishes reciprocal rights and obligations for all parties to the agreement. Thus, any trade benefits or rights that are granted in the agreement apply to all parties.

Chapter 3 of NAFTA establishes the rules with respect to according national treatment to all goods of another party to the agreement and the elimination of all tariff and non-tariff measures against goods of another party.

Annex 300-A of chapter 3 applies to trade and investment in the automotive sector. Annex 300-A states that each party shall accord most-favoured nation treatment to all parties of NAFTA with regard to trade and investment in the automotive sector. However, this general commitment is subject to a number of commitments that are country specific.

The country-specific provisions entered into by Canada include that of the U.S. agreement concerning automotive products between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America that will now be incorporated into NAFTA.

Furthermore, Canada reserves the right to adopt or maintain prohibitions or restrictions on imports of used vehicles from Mexico until, once again that date, January 1, 2009, with a gradual phase-out of prohibitions ending in 2019.

There are prohibitions and requirements that jurisdictions put on concerning environmental issues and safety issues, but jurisdictions also have tight rules to protect their own markets, to protect their own dealers' associations.

In a way, this is breaking down some of those barriers that were artificially put there to support local industry or support local dealer organizations in the past.

This is something that business will have to deal with over time, because it is phased in. I guess one could argue that the NAFTA agreement has been around for many years, so it should not come as a surprise to anybody out there in the public or in the dealers' associations that this is in fact coming.

I can guarantee, and I am sure the members on the government bench will recognize this, that when all is said and done and this bill actually passes through the House, there will be a reaction from dealers' organizations that are going to say they never saw this coming, it was out of the blue, and that the problem was created by the government, when in fact it is part of the free trade process.

The phase-out is related to the age of the vehicles. Used vehicles that are at least 10 years old are the first to have restrictions lifted. Younger vehicles will follow, as I have indicated, over a period of 10 years.

NAFTA also clarifies that these restrictions on imports of used vehicles from Mexico into Canada are not inconsistent with Canada's obligations to provide most-favoured nation treatment to Mexico under our agreements.

The purpose of Bill S-5 is to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act to allow for the importation of used vehicles from Mexico subject to certain conditions. The amendments are required in order to bring Canada into compliance, as I said, with the international trade obligations under NAFTA that we have with Mexico.

Clause 2 of the bill amends the definition of “vehicle” to include “any vehicle that belongs to a prescribed class of vehicles”.

The “prescribed class” of vehicle is defined in the motor vehicle safety regulations as:

a class of vehicle listed in Schedule III [of the regulations] or the class of incomplete vehicle prescribed under subsection 4(1.1) [of the regulations];

I presume that another set of regulations will be promulgated as a result of and after the committee process. Unless we are led to believe that the regulations are all before us now and are already included here, I am really uncertain about that.

Once we have an opportunity to take a look at those regulations, we will be able to see possible limitations, impediments and problems with the whole system.

Clause 3 would amend section 7. Section 5 of the act currently requires that all vehicles sold in Canada and all vehicles of a prescribed class that are imported into Canada must conform with certain safety standards as set out in the regulations of the act. Section 7 permits an exception for used vehicles that are imported from the United States. That is certainly an expanding market, and I will get into that later.

The registrar of imported vehicles is a newer situation involving imported vehicles from the United States. The whole regime has been streamlined over the last few years to make it much easier for imported vehicles coming from the United States and we are seeing increasing numbers of them.

It really depends a lot on the value of the dollar. When the Canadian dollar strengthens, we will see more activity with respect to the cross-border purchase of cars in the United States. Just last year when the Canadian dollar was higher than the U.S. dollar, there was a huge amount of cross-border activity. People were buying cars in the United States because of the value of our dollar.

The people buying these cars in the United States have to deal with the registrar of imported vehicles in order to bring them back. While the system is much better than it was a number of years ago, snags are still being reported with these purchases.

I have heard stories about people who buy vehicles and then have to fill out a tremendous amount of paperwork. The paperwork is relatively easy to get. It is all on the website of the registrar of imported vehicles. The information can simply be printed out. The vehicle essentially gets impounded at the border, so it is tied up for a couple of days. If a purchaser can follow the paperwork, then it is possible to purchase vehicles in the United States. However, that does not make our local dealerships very happy.

Ways have been found to work around the problem with warranties. For example, a company such as Honda will not honour the warranty for a vehicle purchased in the United States. Even though an individual can save money by buying a vehicle in the United States because of the value of the Canadian dollar and the vehicle can be brought into Canada, the individual is on his or her own with respect to the warranty. Toyota's rules were similar in the past, but in the last couple of years its rules have changed and now it will honour warranties on Toyota products purchased in the United States using the registrar of imported vehicles system.

The member for Brandon—Souris was a reputable used car dealer in his youth. He is listening very intently. He is one of the few Conservatives who I would buy a used car from. He is an old friend of mine from Manitoba and very knowledgeable about the automobile industry. He has a soft spot for this topic because it takes him back to his younger days when he was in private business and probably enjoyed life more than he does right now. At least he did not have all the travelling that is involved with being an MP.

The section currently provides that used vehicles, vehicles that have been previously sold at the retail level in the United States that failed to meet the Canadian safety standards, must nonetheless be imported into Canada on the condition that the importer makes a declaration that before the vehicle is presented for registration, it will be made to conform with safety requirements. This exception allows importers of used vehicles from the United States time to bring the vehicles up to levels required by the more stringent Canadian safety standards.

I have mentioned this before, but in spite of all these rules between Canada and the United States, we still had a situation in Manitoba only a year ago, exposed by the CBC on a national program. Under the United States' lemon law system, which is a state-by-state regime, car companies in the United States were forced to buy back lemon vehicles from the owners if they were unable to resolve the issue after four attempts.

I never thought about what actually happens to these vehicles that are bought back by the manufacturers. The CBC found out last year that the cars were being taken from, for example, the state of Florida, which, by the way, used to have the strongest lemon law in the United States, and they were being dumped in, say, Louisiana, which did not have a very good lemon law system. Then the importers, in this case a Manitoba dealership that the member for Brandon—Souris knows and I know as well, were actually importing these cars into Canada for an absolutely ridiculous price, perhaps $13,000 for a two- or three-year-old vehicle, and then were able to mark them up by double. This was serious enough that not only did it make the national news, but the Manitoba government actually introduced legislation to deal with that particular issue. That, of course, caused me to want to encourage it to go further and set up its own lemon law system, on which I have been working with Manitoba for many years, unsuccessfully I might add, to get through. However, that is another issue.

The fact of the matter is that we can all have the frameworks we want for trying to deal with the market with the very best of intentions at heart, but people who want to bend rules will always find a way to do it. So we have to try to collectively put our heads together and come up with the best regulations possible to at least minimize the effect on our consumers in terms of bad outcomes. Bad outcomes, of course, are in many ways related to replaced odometers or rolled back odometers, which we saw in Manitoba for many years coming out of Toronto, taxis being sold at auctions and the cars being sent out to Winnipeg and the odometers rolled back.

As a matter of fact, it was the Filmon Conservative government, which the member opposite from Brandon—Souris was part of, that actually dealt with the problem. We had a dealer who, for the second time in 25 years, was charged under the Weights and Measures Act with systematically rolling back odometers. He was buying cars at auctions in Toronto, putting them on a train, taking them to Manitoba, rolling back or replacing the odometers, and then selling those cars, which he was buying for $4,000, for $8,000. He got caught 25 years ago and was charged under the Weights and Measures Act, which really did not impose much of a fine, I guess, because it did not deter him. He kept doing it for another 25 years, until he was caught again. Then, under the Filmon government, they finally dealt with the problem by requiring people to have a history that would follow the ownership of the car.

It is similar to the system used in England, I believe, where every time the ownership of a car changes, the documentation follows it. There would be a record of the mileage and stuff like that, so if all of a sudden the odometer showed the mileage as half of what it was before, it would be inconsistent.

That was an excellent system they developed and it did solve part of the problem.

However, people with ill intent always find ways to circumvent the rules, and of course, this would be something that we would have to deal with.

Having said all of that, though, I agree. We will be supporting getting this bill to committee, and from there we will see where it takes us.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I do want to take issue. The member for Brandon—Souris is not an old dealer. He is a young, vigorous member of Parliament who serves his constituents very well.

I wonder if the member would agree with me that if we have business people such as the member for Brandon—Souris, who was ethical, focused on his customers, conscientious and hard-working, the same qualities that he brings to the House of Commons when serving his constituents, Canadian consumers would be very well protected in their purchases, if they all had the pleasure of experiencing the quality and ethical service that the member for Brandon—Souris brought to his business, and of course, brings here to the House of Commons.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Brandon—Souris had an excellent record and, as I have indicated, I would buy a used car from him.

Unfortunately some of his fellow members were not as ethical. As I explained, we had a situation where a certain small dealer in the province was rolling back odometers, buying the vehicles in Toronto at the auctions for $4,000, shipping them to Manitoba, rolling them back to 80,000 kilometres and then selling these cars routinely for $8,000, doubling his profit. He was selling perhaps one a week. He would be making $4,000 clear a week, which is not bad money for a one or two person operation.

He was not the only one doing this. A number of people were doing it. He did this after being caught and charged under weights and measures 25 years before. He continued doing this right out in the open for 25 years until he got caught again. Then the government did something about it and it cut it down. This was a number of years ago.

Last year CBC exposed this. When a person buys a new car in the United States, it is under the lemon law acts of the states. The car companies have to purchase these cars back from the owners if they cannot fix the problem after four times. These new cars were being sold by these companies into states with poorer lemon laws and they were being imported into Canada. The dealers who were bringing them in were buying them for $13,000 and selling them for $25,000, making huge profits.

Clearly something is not quite right. Together with the provinces we have to work out better systems to deal with these issues.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask my colleague a question that relates to trafficking of cars, which is often related to organized crime gangs and trafficking of drugs. These are products that organized crime gangs use to generate funds for their illicit activities.

There is an enormous need for the government to work more closely with the not only the RCMP in Canada with the RCMP but also with Interpol to deal with the trafficking and activities of organized crime gangs.

One of the issues is the sharing of information. Interpol has indicated that it would like Canada to take a much greater role, to work with Interpol to share information. Only by sharing information will we be able to have a more effective approach to dealing with the transnational organized crime gangs that are so parasitic in our world.

This is not only a role which we can do with Interpol, but also internationally, with Canada taking a lead role and trying to encourage other members of Interpol to work more closely together with the information sharing aspect.

Does my colleague think we should ask our government to take this opportunity to work more closely with Interpol and help it overcome some of the structural barriers it has in being able to be a more effective agent to deal with organized crime gangs?

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I remind the member that we dealt with this issue just a while back.

The issue was promoted by the Government of Manitoba to make vehicle theft a more serious crime. In the bill we dealt with the issue of VIN numbers and making it illegal to change those numbers.

As the member knows, the VIN numbers are on several parts of the vehicle. They are on the door, the motor, the dash and I believe in the trunk. There are about four or five places on a vehicle.

When the thieves steal these vehicles, they replace the VIN numbers. Now the VIN numbers are being manufactured into the vehicles so they cannot be changed and the government is passing a law to make it illegal to tamper with a VIN number, which is one way of dealing with the issue.

However, there are a number of ways in which these crooks operate and one is to steal the whole vehicle and take it out of the country.

Another type of activity is a chop shop operation. The crooks steal the vehicles and take the vehicles apart in pieces. We find that with Harley-Davidson motorcycles mainly but others as well where they take them apart.

The member is absolutely right. We are talking about criminal gangs and the government has to get tough on white collar crime, chase these criminals and cut off the money supply. Once we cut off the money supply, the problem solves itself.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as we know, this bill relates to NAFTA and compliances that we thought might have been taken care of back when NAFTA was negotiated, going back to 1992.

One of the concerns we had at the time was environmental regulation. We now see a government going to Cancun without a lot in the tank. I wonder whether the timing is a coincidence and that this will be seen as its offering to environmental standards. In fact, this is really a fig leaf for a lack of any kind of real environmental policy. Clearly this should have been done long ago.

Why is the government bringing it up now? Does he think that there might be something more to it than just what we are seeing in front of us today?

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, we would have to check the blues from the parliamentary secretary's speech earlier, but it seems to me that this requirement will initially allow vehicles that are 10 years old and older to be brought in. Then vehicles less than 10 years old will be phased in up to 2019. Those vehicles will all to have emission and safety standards complied with. However, interestingly enough, vehicles that are over 15 years old are considered vintage vehicles and they do not have to comply with any safety requirements or environmental standards whatsoever.

I guess the people in Cancun right now would be sort of interested. We should send them a fax and let them know what the government is up to up here. It is going to allow any vehicle that is over 15 years old to be brought into the country with no emission standards required.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise, on behalf of the Liberal Party, to speak to Bill S-5, An Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. The short title of the bill is “Ensuring Safe Vehicles Imported from Mexico for Canadians Act”.

This was introduced in the Senate on April 14. The purpose of the bill is to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Canadian Environment Protection Act to allow for the importation of used vehicles from Mexico, subject to certain conditions. These amendments are necessary to ensure that Canada is in compliance with its international trade obligations under NAFTA.

Everyone knows what NAFTA is. It is the free trade agreement that was signed between Canada, the United States and Mexico. Its objectives were to eliminate trade barriers and facilitate cross-border movement of goods. NAFTA, like all free trade agreements, establishes reciprocal rights and obligations for all parties to the agreement. Thus any trade benefit or rights that are granted in the agreement apply to all parties.

There has been some inconsistency or incongruity in the application of NAFTA where it concerns Mexico. There are some amendments to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act which would allow for used vehicles from the United States, previously sold at the retail value in the United States, that failed to meet the Canadian safety standards, to be imported into Canada on condition that the person importing the car would make a declaration that before the vehicle would be presented for registration, it would be made to conform with safety requirements. This is to allow importers of used vehicles from the United States the time to bring their vehicles up to the stringent Canadian safety standards.

The amendment to this section therefore would also extend to importation of used vehicles from Mexico that fail to meet Canadian safety standard requirements. These are important because there have been restrictions on vehicles from Mexico and not from the United States. As a partner of NAFTA, this will provide the mechanism to ensure vehicles that are sold in Canada meet Canadian safety requirements.

Bill S-5 would also amend the Canadian Environment Protection Act to allow for the importation of used vehicles from Mexico with certain conditions applied. The CEPA is necessary because any vehicle that comes into Canada has to meet our CEPA standards.

Simply put, Bill S-5 would bring Canada into compliance with its NAFTA obligation regarding the importation of used cars from Mexico. Although NAFTA was signed approximately two decades ago, several provisions were delayed. This is one of those provisions. When NAFTA was signed, Canada reserved the right to maintain all our restrictions on used vehicles until January 1, 2009. Since then, we have embarked on a 10 year process to phase out all of Canada's restrictions.

Currently, when used vehicles are imported into Canada from the United States, they do not have to meet our environmental and safety standards as they cross the border. However, as I mentioned, the owner must commit to ensuring that before he or she registers and licenses the vehicle, the necessary repairs and upgrades have been made so the vehicle is compliant. This is a really straightforward concept. We do not want cars that keep on emitting greenhouse gases because they have not been properly maintained. I listened to the debate and presentations on this.

We have problems in the third world, for example, with recycled and reconditioned cars. In Japan, for example, where after four years a car cannot be utilized and must be disposed of, those cars are reconditioned and sent off to third world countries. The cycle of cars going from one country to another without meeting proper environmental standards is problematic for us if we do not enforce the legislation.

The legislation would rectify an incongruity. The odd thing about that is that permission was not granted to vehicles imported from Mexico despite the fact that it is a NAFTA partner, so Bill S-5 attempts to rectify the incongruity.

The bill deals with two sets of regulations, the Canada vehicle safety regulation and Canada's environmental regulations, both of which are critical for the safe and clean operation of motor vehicles in Canada. Used vehicles imported into Canada from any location must meet both our safety and environmental regulations. I do not think anyone in the House would oppose this type of regulation. However, I would argue that it makes sense for us to allow the importers of these used vehicles to bring them into Canada for the upgrades necessary to bring them up to standard.

If our laws continue to prevent that work from being done in Canada, we would be punishing our auto mechanics. If used cars are at our borders, and we are not saying there are thousands of vehicles at the borders, and we allow the Mexican businesses to look after it, we would lose a lot of ground for our own auto mechanics. As part of NAFTA, we cannot give up that portion of the job creation that we would have. Plus, we have environmental standards that need to be met and our environmental standards are probably not the same as the ones in Mexico.

I believe it is an important aspect that those vehicles should come here for upgrades instead of allowing the advantage to go to some other country.

What I do not understand is why it took the government so long to introduce the measure because, as I mentioned, it was January 1, 2009 when we were supposed to implement the restrictions on used vehicles and it has taken until 2010 for the government to bring about these changes. The delay cannot be attributed to the opposition. Sometimes the government has a tendency to say that every delay on every bill is an opposition problem and because it was introduced late in the Senate, we need to move it quickly to ensure that it can go to committee for a better review.

What are the implications of the bill? The obvious implication of the bill is that the Canadian market may see more used cars from Mexico for sale domestically as a consequence of the increased liberalization of trade in used vehicles. The bill, however, proposes amendments to these two pieces of legislation in order to maintain a consistency in the level and safety standards of all vehicles being used in Canada regardless of whether they are used or whether they have been imported from the United States or Mexico.

If we look at what the stakeholders have said, the Imported Vehicle Owner's Association of Canada, which claims to represent hundreds of businesses and thousands of individuals who import vehicles into Canada, it indicated that it was in support of this amendment. The Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers Association has yet to present its views on this. If we are to ensure safety, consistency and congruence with NAFTA, I would like to see that the bill goes to committee.

It is important that Canada live up to its NAFTA commitments. There is no evidence to suggest there is a caravan of dirty, unsafe Mexican cars waiting at our borders. Bill S-5 would not weaken our environmental or safety laws but we need to send it to committee to ensure that a thorough analysis is done. We should let the committee do its job and listen to various witnesses.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague comes from a city where organized crime has taken root, as it has across our country. It is a very serious problem in her city, as it is for all of us.

Does my colleague think that the Government of Canada should be taking a much more intelligent view with respect to crime, particularly organized crime? It is not doing as much as it ought to be doing to address organized crime, which is a very serious problem.

Police agencies, particularly the RCMP, try very hard to deal with this problem. They are labouring under some fairly archaic rules and regulations. One thing the government could do is work with the RCMP more closely and ask front-line officers what they need to conduct proper, effective investigations to build cases against these individuals and bring them to trial.

Does my friend think that the Government of Canada should be taking a smarter view to deal with crime? Does she think that one thing it could be doing is listening to the grassroots RCMP officers on the ground about the challenges they are facing and deal with their unmet needs?

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I did not mention it in my speech, but carjacking and car theft is a very lucrative business in some of the urban centres and maybe in the rural centres. It is a very dangerous business. High-end cars are being carjacked and stolen. There is a perception that organized crime is behind high-end carjackings.

Though the RCMP is trying its best, it needs resources, more police officers and laws it can enforce. It is sad that when perpetrators are found, the gangs cannot be broken because of archaic laws or lack of resources for a cohesive strategy. A car that is carjacked in Toronto could end up in Mexico or China, and vice versa. Police need the resources globally to address this problem.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the member the same question that she asked me when I spoke about the bill. Why does she feel that it took the government so long to come up with legislation? The Conservative government is always in a rush. It pressures the opposition parties and even accuses them of not acting quickly enough when it comes to its bills. It bogs down some committees with bills, specifically justice bills. What does she think are the Conservative government's reasons for being so pushy?

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I know that in many committees Conservative members have been filibustering. There has been a lack of co-operation. If the government really thinks a bill is important, it has to work on it. It has to be smart on crime. In January 2009 it had an opportunity to introduce amendments to the bill and it has taken until just recently for the government to do it. Why does it want to hurry bills through?

It would have been better for the member to pose the question to the minister himself. Why is it that the Conservatives are in a hurry to pass everything? Are they trying to prove to Canadians that they have been able to pass legislation? Legislation cannot be passed without proper due process, but the government has the habit of bypassing due process in an effort to show that it was able to pass certain bills.

It is high time this problem were resolved. We should not pass bills just for the sake of it. We should send them to committee for better review.

[Alan Tonks, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there are two components to the bill. There is the component with respect to the safety of vehicles that are going across borders from Mexico to Canada and Canada to Mexico. The second part is the vehicles that are being transported by organized crime.

My colleague mentioned the lack of police resources both in Mexico and Canada for the whole issue of trans-border shipment of vehicles that are in the category of proceeds of crime. When they are finally apprehended and the vehicles are returned to their owners, safe or not, the issue becomes how we mobilize our resources to follow up in the public's interest.

Should there be a parallel legislative approach that would toughen up and make more secure the proceeds of crime legislation? In order for law enforcement agencies to track these vehicles and the criminal parties involved, they need the resources to do that job for both the unsafe vehicles and those that have been transported illegally.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's question brings a very important aspect to bear. Organized crime is quite lucrative and very nimble. It beats out police resources.

The police are bogged down with legislation that does not help them become nimble. As they do not have the resources to be as nimble, the fact they can even catch them is a miracle in itself. There has to be tougher legislation on the proceeds from crime.

It is important that when this bill is reviewed by committee that safety and environmental standards are looked at. This is an aspect that is critical for Canada. We are talking about greenhouse gas emissions, et cetera, and we need to ensure that the safety standards Canada has are high quality and that Mexico and others follow it.

To answer the member's question, yes, we need to have strong legislation.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Mr. Speaker, all of the speeches that were given today certainly indicate that members are in favour of moving this legislation along. Of course, it is long overdue. NAFTA was put in place quite a while back and this is just an entity to move us a little closer to what NAFTA actually directed people to do.

At the end of the day, we heard the government side trying to boast that this was almost a climate change bill. I am assuming the government brought this before the House because it is on its way to Cancun. It would have been much better for the government to go to Cancun with Bill C-311, the climate change accountability bill. I am sure that my colleague would support my comment that that would have been a better bill to be going to Cancun with.

Could the member elaborate on the fact that this would create jobs in Canada when we put this forward?

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague that this is not a climate change bill. It brings congruence in NAFTA between how we treat the United States and how we treat Mexico.

We should be getting cars over here and ensure that our automotive sector and our mechanics get the jobs rather than see those jobs go somewhere else.

Hopefully, the committee will discuss these issues very thoroughly before it makes a decision.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

Question.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I declare the motion carried.

(Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I would ask for consent to see the clock as 6:30 p.m.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Shall I see the clock as 6:30 p.m.?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.