Bill C-20 (Historical)

Canada-Honduras Economic Growth and Prosperity Act

An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Honduras, the Agreement on Environmental Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Honduras and the Agreement on Labour Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Honduras

This enactment implements the Free Trade Agreement and the related agreements on environmental and labour cooperation entered into between Canada and the Republic of Honduras and done at Ottawa on November 5, 2013.
The general provisions of the enactment specify that no recourse may be taken on the basis of the provisions of Part 1 of the enactment or any order made under that Part, or the provisions of the Free Trade Agreement or the related agreements themselves, without the consent of the Attorney General of Canada.
Part 1 of the enactment approves the Free Trade Agreement and the related agreements and provides for the payment by Canada of its share of the expenditures associated with the operation of the institutional aspects of the agreements and the power of the Governor in Council to make orders for carrying out the provisions of the enactment.
Part 2 of the enactment amends existing laws in order to bring them into conformity with Canada’s obligations under the Free Trade Agreement and the related agreement on labour cooperation entered into between Canada and the Republic of Honduras.
Part 3 of the enactment contains coordinating amendments and the coming into force provision.

Canada-Honduras Economic Growth and Prosperity Act

[Charmaine Borg, NDP, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will get straight to my question. The Conservative member said that there were a lot of poor people in Honduras and that this agreement would help them. However, we know that there is a huge disparity between the rich and the poor. My concern is that this agreement will make the rich richer and the poor poorer. The government has not implemented any measures to prevent that from happening. I would like to hear my colleague comment on that.

[Jasbir Sandhu, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, that is the twisted logic of the Conservative government on how this trade agreement would help the poor.

The government is corrupt. In a corrupt country, there is no trickle-down effect. Everything is absorbed at the top. The poor will remain poor in Honduras unless there is less corruption and an honourable government. That is not the case.

The government could have used some of its weight to ensure that labour rights, human rights, and environmental rights were honoured in Honduras. Unfortunately, the government has failed to do that.

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to speak right after my colleague from Surrey North and after my many official opposition colleagues who made very relevant speeches, the first being the NDP's international trade critic, the member for Vancouver Kingsway.

I want to get off to a good start by quoting the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 18, verses 15 to 17:

If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over.

But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’

If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

Despite all of our efforts and all the times we have reached out, the government has shamefully imposed time allocation for the 52nd and 53rd time, in front of millions of witnesses, the millions of Canadian we proudly represent with dignity here in the House of Commons.

Despite the fact that I always try to treat government members like my sisters and brothers, the Conservatives have repeatedly spit in our faces. That is what they always do. Democracy has been denied from the outset. Now, we are studying a bill that, if passed, will be another source of shame for the people of this country. This is very serious.

Before thinking about my speech and delivering it here in the House, I took the time to listen to what the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade had to say. I also listened to the entire speech given by my esteemed colleague, the hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway, who is the NDP's international trade critic.

To begin, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade tried to create a smokescreen by extolling the virtues of the future free trade agreement between Canada and Europe. He did not disclose a single word of it, though. We are still in the dark about this free trade agreement, which we may support. The government is completely refusing to co-operate on that front.

As the member for Vancouver Kingsway said so well, other than the bill that was introduced in the House of Commons, we know nothing about the impact this agreement will have. The real problem goes beyond the government's claims that it wants to create jobs and bolster the Canadian and Honduran economies. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade and the entire Conservative government—with active, enthusiastic support from the Liberals—are defending the indefensible. If this agreement goes into effect, it will go against the spirit of key international human rights treaties. That is unspeakable, not to mention completely immoral. Beyond the so-called economic arguments—which are more like wishful thinking, astrology or some other pseudo-science—there is no argument as convincing as denouncing the fundamental immorality of the bill introduced in the House.

Now I would like to focus on my Liberal colleagues. I was shocked to hear the speech from the hon. member for Toronto Centre. The Liberals are advocating a position that is very far removed from the position of Lester B. Pearson's government.

The Liberals' philosophy is some 500 years behind, stuck in a time of slavery and exploitation of the colonies and entire populations, the world over.

It is not so surprising to see the Liberals getting on board with the Conservatives. It has been said time and again in the House: there are major problems in Honduras. Organized crime is widespread. Democracy was wiped out in 2009, and there is no indication or meaningful evidence that this democracy is really vibrant or beneficial to the people of Honduras.

It is very easy to understand why this government is defending tooth and nail the bill we are considering and debating in the House for such a horribly limited amount of time. We know that the Conservatives have a penchant for fraudulent ways. They were caught using an in and out scheme and allowing their data bank to be used to voluntarily lead thousands of voters astray to false polling stations during past elections.

It is incredible that I am standing here in the House right now denouncing things that no party should even imagine or consider doing.

Currently, the party in power is denying its responsibility, denying reality and, in fact, is continuing along its merry way as though nothing happened. It even suggests that there were administrative issues at play when we talk about the in and out scheme. So it comes as no surprise that it is defending Bill C-20, a bill that might just be a blight on Canada's reputation.

I hope that my Conservative and Liberal colleagues will listen to reason and change their positions on this.

The situation has been described at length, but I want to go over it again. It is chilling to think about the murder rate and the number of people who live in fear in that country. In fact, it is not complicated; the entire population of Honduras lives in fear daily, except of course a very limited group of people that must represent, at best, a few thousand people. In fact, it is probably just a few hundred people only. They live in comfort, safety and luxury. In Honduras, a truly very small elite group enjoys this type of benefits.

How can they justify supporting a government that tolerates the reign of organized crime? Can any of my colleagues on the government or Liberal benches answer that? I have asked the question several times. Nobody has had the guts to give me a straight answer on that.

In closing, I would like to debunk an urban myth that the government has slyly, though crudely, tried to cultivate. It would have us believe the warped logic that if we support economic development, democracy will just materialize. That kind of logic is anything but divinely inspired. First of all, that is absolutely not the case, because there is no mention of the economy in this.

This urban legend belongs in the same category as the urban myth perpetuated all over social media and the Internet about how if you pass a car at night that does not have its headlights on, you should not flash your brights at it because it is part of a gang initiation ritual. Before I was elected, I had a little free time, and I researched that. I discovered that no law enforcement organization in North America had ever recorded a crime related to that kind of thing.

The government is making things up and trying to mislead the Canadian public, just like it does with other issues. Enough is enough.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as far as I know, Canada is a respectable country.

If Canada signs free trade agreements with countries that violate rights and commit acts of violence against their own citizens, does this not give other perhaps less respectable countries permission to do the same thing? Does this not also tarnish Canada's reputation?

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Hochelaga raises an excellent question.

A little earlier in the House, I had the privilege of talking about one of the many things I am reading right now, an essay on economics by the renowned economist Esther Duflo, who is one of President Obama's advisors in the United States. I think she still is. Her essay is entitled “Repenser la pauvreté” or “Rethinking Poverty”.

The economic framework and the framework of democratic institutions are crucial factors when we talk about developing countries, poor countries and extreme poverty.

One thing that all economics experts can agree on is that it is impossible for a country to provide economic security and favourable conditions for economic development if it does not make people feel secure and if there is no sound government that guarantees individual rights.

[Denis Blanchette, NDP, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his speech. He talked a lot about morality, particularly at the beginning of his speech.

I get a feeling that the fundamental disagreement we have with the government has to do with how we look at free trade agreements. Indeed, the government looks at them only from a market standpoint, which is completely amoral. I did not say “immoral”, but rather “amoral”. That is very important. We examine these agreements from a moral standpoint.

I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I continue to appreciate the nuanced thinking of my colleague from Louis-Hébert, with whom I have worked for a long time, nine years to be exact. We went into politics in 2005.

I find it very interesting that there has been no reaction to my speech from the government or even the Liberals. That probably says a lot about their inability to credibly maintain their position and their embarrassment at being a party to what the House will unfortunately be asked to do, which is pass this free trade agreement bill.

Under what conditions and how can we blot out this stain on Canada's reputation? I do not know what to answer.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague for his speech.

This government has often brought in free trade agreements. Some have been beneficial for Canada, Quebec, the other provinces and the signatory countries.

However, in other cases, such as the Colombia agreement—that is the most recent example I can think of—there have been reprisals against journalists, arbitrary imprisonments and environmental and labour rights violations. I believe that we will see the same pattern with the Honduras free trade agreement.

Should the government not be setting an example when ratifying free trade agreements? Should it not be showing the world and the country concerned that an economic agreement could be concluded, but that first and foremost the country must respect fundamental rights? That is what the member mentioned in his speech. It seems to me that we would be setting an example before entering into a free trade agreement.

The Conservatives are doing the exact opposite. They are telling us that they will sign the agreement and then convince them to improve their human rights record.

Does my colleague have any examples where such agreements have been signed with countries such as Colombia and the situation has improved? I do not believe so, and I would like to hear what he has to say about that.

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would really like to thank the member for Richmond—Arthabaska for his remarks and his question. I found no such examples. Perhaps my research was not extensive enough.

I would like to raise another issue about another recent debate. I am talking about the agreement with Panama, a country where, despite the government's claim that it is fighting tax evasion, tax fraud shores up a government that is still too tolerant of tax evasion and is still a tax haven in the eyes of authorities such as the International Monetary Fund.

It is absolutely unbelievable. I completely agree with my colleague from Richmond—Arthabaska.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, The Budget; the hon. member for Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, Industry.

Resuming debate. The hon. member for South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Don Valley West.

It is my pleasure this afternoon to highlight how the Canada-Honduras free trade agreement would fit with Canada's strategy for engagement in the Americas.

Canada's prosperity requires expansion beyond our borders into new markets for economic opportunities that serve to grow Canada's exports and investments. As members will recall, the Prime Minister announced the Americas as a foreign policy priority in 2007, with a vision of a more prosperous, secure, and democratic hemisphere. Seven years on, our whole-of-government engagement in the hemisphere has never been stronger.

There are three goals in the Americas strategy. The first is to increase Canadian and hemispheric economic opportunity. The second is to address insecurity and advance freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law through capacity-building. The third is to build a stable foundation for Canada's engagement and increased influence in the hemisphere.

Stronger economic ties are becoming increasingly important with uncertainty in the global economy. Our government understands the importance of trade to our economy. It represents one out of every five jobs in Canada and accounts for 64% of our country's annual income.

Increased engagement through trade and commercial economic ties is one of the best ways we can support positive change and sustainable economic growth in the Americas.

Our Conservative government's efforts to increase mutual economic opportunity centre on creating the conditions for a dynamic, transparent, and rules-based commercial and investment environment. In particular, advancing free trade in the Americas opens new doors of opportunity for Canadian and Honduran companies and increases economic benefits for all, including more jobs and prosperity.

Canada and Honduras have enjoyed a very positive relationship since we first established diplomatic relations in 1961. Given our demonstrated commitment to democratic development, our important development assistance program—which is the biggest development program we operate in Central America—and our growing trade and investment linkages, Canada continues to be a constructive partner for Honduras.

Canada, represented by the former minister of the environment, the member for Thornhill, played a leading role in efforts to reach a peaceful, negotiated solution to the political crisis sparked by the coup d'état in Honduras in June 2009.

On the economic front, bilateral merchandise trade between Canada and Honduras reached $257 million in 2012, growing 9% over the previous year. Merchandise exports to Honduras were a modest $38 million in 2012, while imports from Honduras were $218 million. Undoubtedly, our new agreement will allow us to increase our exports substantially in a range of industry sectors.

With respect to capital, Canadian direct foreign investment is most prominent in Honduras in the garment, manufacturing, and mining industries. Tourism is a growing industry in Honduras, and Canadians are a significant factor. From January to October of last year, 25,000 Canadians visited Honduras, with an additional 37,000 Canadians entering the country by cruise ships over that same period.

As with any trade agreement, various industries in each province would benefit through increased exports and the new jobs that would be created.

The Canada-Honduras free trade agreement would benefit exporters from my home province of British Columbia through the elimination of Honduran tariffs in sectors of export interest, such as textiles, which currently face up to 15% tariffs; industrial machinery, also facing tariffs of up to 15%; and construction equipment, which would also see the elimination of current tariffs, which range up to 15%. Additionally, B.C.'s forestry sector stands to benefit with the elimination of tariffs, as wood and pulp and paper products currently face tariffs as high as 15%.

Seven of Canada's concluded free trade agreements are with countries in the Americas: Mexico, through NAFTA; Chile; Costa Rica; Peru; Colombia; Panama; and, of course, Honduras.

Our government recognizes the need to make companies aware of the advantages and opportunities that they create to maximize the mutual benefits flowing from these agreements. Our strategic push to liberalize trade with the Americas is working. We are removing barriers and facilitating two-way commerce.

The Americas offer great potential. Total trade between countries in the Americas and Canada, which was at $56 billion in 2012, has increased by 32% since 2007, and Canadian direct investment in the region, at $168 billion in 2012, has increased by 58% since 2007.

In order to continue to promote mutual economic opportunity, our government's strategy for engagement in the Americas focuses on intensifying trade promotion and relationship-building efforts to ensure that the Canadian private sector is taking full advantage of trade and economic agreements, as well as on building the capacity of our trading partners to capitalize on the benefits of free trade with Canada. The Canada-Americas trade-related technical assistance program, for example, serves to assist Canada's trade partners in Latin America and the Caribbean region to maximize the opportunities and benefits of increased trade and investment afforded them through their free trade agreements with Canada.

In line with our strategy, our Conservative government is committed to a strong economic partnership with Honduras that would contribute to enhanced prosperity and sustainable economic growth in both countries. For example, there are currently a number of development projects under way in Honduras which aim to improve food security, such as the Special Programme for Food Security.

The free trade agreement and its parallel agreements on labour and environmental co-operation would promote responsible commercial exchange while building a winning advantage for our companies, in particular in areas where Canada has experience an expertise, such as in natural resource management.

However, it is important to recall that prosperity and security are mutually reinforcing. To enable and protect Canadian trade and commercial investments, the security situation in Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean must be taken into consideration, and it has rightly been made a focus in our strategy for engagement in the Americas. Recognizing the challenges to overcome for peace and prosperity in the region, Canada has committed over $70 million in security assistance to Central America since 2008, with $25 million announced in 2012 by the Prime Minister for the Canadian initiative for security in Central America. Through such investments, we are helping to strengthen security and institutions that safeguard freedom, human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. Canada also works closely with the Central American integration system to improve donor coordination and security co-operation in Central America.

Honduras is also a country of focus for Canadian development programming, through which we are stimulating sustainable economic growth, increasing food security, and securing the future of children and youth. The Building Effective Justice Systems project, for example, contributes to the strengthening of the criminal justice system through training in crime scene examination, investigation, and oral trial techniques.

In a region where relationships are fundamental to success, long-term and multi-faceted engagement is a vital part of Canada's strategy for engagement in the Americas. Competition for market share is on the rise, and Canada must demonstrate that it is a serious and committed partner. The engagement of the Prime Minister, ministers, and Conservative members has been central to this effort.

While sustaining high-level engagement is essential, our government continues to build and strengthen relationships across the private sector, government, academia, civil society, and among individuals. Through our strong bilateral relationships and the increasing people-to-people networks generated through educational exchanges, increased tourism, and business links, our ties with Honduras are growing stronger every day, and we are seeing an increase in the opportunities for both countries.

The Canada-Honduras free trade agreement and the parallel labour and environmental co-operation agreements are key components to advance in Honduras the goals of Canada's strategy for engagement in the Americas. I ask all hon. members for their support.

[Marc-André Morin, NDP, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague mentioned tourism several times. That is an interesting subject. In Canada, tourism is slowing down and has been for years. Canada was once a great global tourism destination. Now it seems like nothing is happening and there is hardly any promotion of Canadian tourism to people in other countries.

I would like to know where people are going. Whenever people talk about tourism, the destinations are tax havens and warmer countries. Why not get people to come to Canada to visit our country? We have so many tourist attractions. Can my colleague comment on this? We are definitely bringing up the rear.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's question and comments. I do hope he is not trying to discourage Canadians from finding a warmer climate in which to spend some time during the winter.

However, he asks about our initiatives to increase tourism to Canada, and I would point out that we are increasing tourism to Canada. Looking at the opportunities we have created, for example, for Asian tourists to come to our beautiful country, we see that we have provided visa-free access to the Taiwanese in recent years. More recently, we have seen an increase in the number of Chinese tourists coming to Canada; as many as 400,000 last year, I am told. From people I have spoken with, I hear that when they go to Niagara Falls or other iconic destinations in Canada they see a large number of tourists from around the world, but particularly from Asia, where we have focused heavily on promoting Canada's opportunity for tourism.

Yes, Canadians want to spend some time in warmer climates, perhaps during the winter, but we are also making ourselves very inviting to the rest of the world.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, we look at the trade agreement and see it as a positive. I want to get to the bigger picture in terms of trade in general.

When the Conservatives first took office, they inherited a significant, sizable trade surplus, which assisted in terms of literally tens of thousands of jobs as a direct result of that trade surplus. It did not take the Conservatives long to turn a surplus into a multi-billion-dollar trade deficit.

The question I have for the member is this. Does the Conservative government, today, have any plans as to when we can expect Canada to be on the plus side once again, in terms of a trade surplus as opposed to a trade deficit? Can the member indicate what year Canadians can anticipate that a Conservative government would be able to ensure we have a trade surplus?

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Mr. Speaker, certainly the member does not expect me to predict the future. However, he does bring to mind the Liberal record.

It was not long ago that the Liberals were in power for 13 long years, as many people describe it. We might ask ourselves how many trade agreements they accomplished during those 13 years. The answer is three. That is not much to have accomplished during that long period of government.

Yet here we are, a Conservative government since 2006, and we have concluded agreements with 37 countries while, at the same time, improving the trade relations we have with the three that the Liberals were able to secure.

When the member opposite tries to attack our government on our trading relationship, it is a bit rich for him to go down that path, considering his own record of engagement in that party.