House of Commons Hansard #115 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was heritage.

Topics

Registered Retirement Savings PlansOral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Bloc

Yvan Loubier Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not realize that his Minister of Finance is himself responsible for that uncertainty and that unacceptable situation. Yesterday morning, RRSPs were not going to be taxed; in the afternoon, the minister did not know for sure, while in the evening there was a possibility that RRSPs might be taxed. This is irresponsible on the part of the government.

If the government really wants to show taxpayers that it is serious about reducing spending and not increasing taxes, why does the Prime Minister refuse to formally pledge that he will not raise taxes and that he will not tax RRSPs? The Prime Minister must fulfill his promise!

Registered Retirement Savings PlansOral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, we have to wait. The budget will be tabled in February, as is the case every year. The answer will then be known. In the meantime, the Minister of Finance is doing his homework. I think it is a very good idea to consult people and not rule out any solution. Let us not forget that some people complain that our tax system is not always adequate and is sometimes unfair. The minister is considering the whole issue of taxation. Moreover, he is inviting all Canadians to make representations. For example, Mr. Battle, who works in the field of social policy in Canada, appeared before the committee yesterday and said that the government could go ahead with its reform but should also look at the taxation issue to ensure that the system is fair to all Canadians.

CrtcOral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Reform

Art Hanger Reform Calgary Northeast, AB

Mr. Speaker, there are still a lot of unanswered questions relating to the Daniilidis application.

The Minister of Canadian Heritage took six months to clarify his intervention to Mr. Daniilidis' application. When did the Prime Minister learn of the intervention by the Minister of Canadian Heritage?

CrtcOral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of this month.

CrtcOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Reform

Art Hanger Reform Calgary Northeast, AB

Mr. Speaker, in 1978 John Munro called a judge on behalf of a man being tried for an offence. He was forced to resign from the cabinet because this was in violation of ministerial rules of conduct established by Prime Minister Trudeau at the time.

Will the present Prime Minister uphold the ethical standards that were applied by Prime Minister Trudeau and ask the Minister of Canadian Heritage for his resignation?

CrtcOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I explained exactly the situation. It is not the same situation at all. I looked at this situation with the documentation that is in front of the public. The minister acted as soon as he learned that his letter created the impression that he had tried to influence the case. He clarified it very clearly in unequivocal terms. I am satisfied that he has done in the circumstances what had to be done to clarify it to make sure there was no ambiguity.

Safety Of Blood SupplyOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Pauline Picard Bloc Drummond, QC

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Health. Mr. Justice Krever will give groups represented before the commission only ten days to formulate comments and make recommendations and only two days to question the experts, after the report on the blood supply system is tabled.

In the public interest and in order to give groups represented before the Krever Commission a chance to give this report some careful study, will the minister agree to ask Mr. Justice Krever to give the groups more time to look at the details of the report?

Safety Of Blood SupplyOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Sudbury Ontario

Liberal

Diane Marleau LiberalMinister of Health

Mr. Speaker, I am surprised at the question. We have just had a series of questions based on interference. Now the Bloc asks me if I will intervene with a judge.

No, I will not. The Krever commission is a judicial inquiry. Mr. Krever did ask for an extension of his time, did ask for additional moneys to study the blood supply system and we did give him the additional moneys and the additional time in order to do a very good job in studying the blood supply system in Canada.

CrtcOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Reform

Elwin Hermanson Reform Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK

Mr. Speaker, earlier this morning the Minister of Canadian Heritage tabled a letter that he wrote to Mr. Pattichis regarding an application to the CRTC. That letter was in response to a letter he received on September 20.

I wonder whether the minister would table that letter and any other communications he had regarding this case.

CrtcOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Laval West Québec

Liberal

Michel Dupuy LiberalMinister of Canadian Heritage

Mr. Speaker, the letter addressed to me of course is privileged by the writer but I will be in touch with him. If he agrees this will be tabled.

CrtcOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

NDP

Simon de Jong NDP Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK

Mr. Speaker, my question is addressed to the Prime Minister.

In this age of government cutbacks and free trade agreements and rapid technological change Canada needs a strong minister to protect and promote our cultural heritage.

This latest mistake, as the Prime Minister described the actions of the minister of heritage, is further proof of an alarming incompetence by the minister and his office.

Will the Prime Minister ask the minister of heritage to do the honourable thing and resign?

CrtcOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

No, Mr. Speaker.

InfrastructureOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Liberal

Reg Alcock Liberal Winnipeg South, MB

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board and the minister responsible for the national infrastructure program.

We have heard many members opposite suggest that the national infrastructure program is simply filling potholes in the nation's highways.

As this is Technology in Government Week, I would like to ask the minister if he could tell us what the infrastructure program is doing to build the electronic highway for the next century.

InfrastructureOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

York Centre Ontario

Liberal

Art Eggleton LiberalPresident of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure

Mr. Speaker, fully two-thirds of the infrastructure program are traditionally roads, sewers and sidewalks and these are projects that have a long term payback in our communities in terms of attracting additional investment dollars and improving the quality of life. We also are helping to fund information highway projects.

Some $27 million of infrastructure money is going into high technology infrastructure mainly in our school systems in New Brunswick, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario. It is not only helping in terms of better communications but it is helping to improve the education system to help prepare our young people for the future.

Points Of OrderOral Question Period

3 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Elsie Wayne Progressive Conservative Saint John, NB

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order and draw to your attention the official Hansard debates for Tuesday, October 25, 1994. On page 7178 is my member's statement on national parks. The first sentence of the last paragraph states:

The premier of the province of New Brunswick has quietly increased over 1,00 different fees-

This is incorrect. What I actually stated was "1,000 different fees". In the French version of the Hansard for the same day my statement was recorded correctly. I offer this as a correction and I trust that members will concur.

Points Of OrderOral Question Period

3 p.m.

The Speaker

We will look into this request.

Business Of The HouseOral Question Period

3 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would appreciate it if the Leader of the Government in the House would announce the business of the House for the next few days.

Business Of The HouseOral Question Period

3 p.m.

Windsor West Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the weekly business statement. When you call Orders of the Day, we will commence the second reading debate on Bill C-57 regarding the World Trade Organization.

Tomorrow we will start with Bill C-36 regarding the Split Lake agreement. This will be followed by resumption of debate on Bill C-53 regarding the Canadian heritage department reorganization, and Bill C-54 respecting technical changes in the Canada pension plan and old age security legislation.

On Monday we will commence second reading of Bill C-56, amendments to the environmental assessment legislation. We would then return to uncompleted debates such as those on Bills C-53, C-54, C-36, or Bill C-55, the Yukon surface rights bill.

On Tuesday we shall return if necessary to Bill C-57, followed by resumption of other unfinished debates.

On Wednesday we shall begin with Bill C-50, the Canadian Wheat Board amendments after which we would again return to unfinished debates.

We will assess progress on legislation early next week before announcing business for Thursday and Friday. However members opposite may want to know now that I may well designate next Thursday as an opposition day, but this will be subject obviously to confirmation.

World Trade Organization Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

3 p.m.

Etobicoke North Ontario

Liberal

Roy MacLaren LiberalMinister for International Trade

moved that Bill C-57, an act to implement the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, the legislation we are considering today, Bill C-57, is an act to implement the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization. The bill will ensure the implementation of the GATT agreement which I signed on behalf of Canada in Morocco in April.

Adoption of this legislation will enable Canadians to reap the benefits of the biggest trade deal in history. By creating a more open and stable international trading environment this agreement will generate increased Canadian exports and investment. Exports, the driving force behind Canada's recent economic recovery, are crucial to the achievement of this government's job and growth agenda and to Canada's continuing prosperity.

The legislation before us today approves the agreement. It amends Canada's existing laws and tariff schedules to bring them into conformity with our obligations under the Uruguay round agreement. Finally, it provides for the appointment of representatives to the new World Trade Organization and for the payment of Canada's share of its budget.

We made clear before assuming office that a Liberal government would continue to support GATT as the cornerstone of Canada's trade policy. We undertook to focus our efforts on breaking the deadlock in the GATT Uruguay round of negotiations and on building a new World Trade Organization. This legislation before us today is the fruit of those efforts.

The Uruguay round, the largest most comprehensive trade negotiation ever undertaken, involved more governments than any of the previous rounds of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. The final package contains over 30 agreements, understandings and declarations, capped by the agreement to

create the new World Trade Organization. The agreements include an enormous package of national commitments to lower tariffs and non-tariff barriers to merchandise trade, a thorough reform of trade rules and the extension of the world trading system to cover such new issues as trade in services and trade in intellectual property.

Completion of the Uruguay round will have major implications for the world and for the Canadian economy well into the next century. Conclusion of the round after seven and a half years of difficult and uncertain negotiations has already had a positive impact through improved confidence in the global economy.

The GATT Secretariat in Geneva estimates that the global income will be at least $500 billion higher in the year 2005, some 10 years hence, than it would have been without the Uruguay round. Some economists believe that even these numbers, large though they are, may underestimate the impetus to growth, innovation and investment that will result from the Uruguay round agreement. Economists without exception have underlined the substantial potential benefits for all members of the global trading system, including Canada.

Using prudent economic assumptions, we estimate quantifiable Canadian gains of at least a .4 per cent increase in real income, or $3 billion annually when the agreement is fully phased in. These are however only a fraction of the actual gains that will certainly occur.

Although this Uruguay round agreement covers a wide array of issues affecting international trade relations, three areas stand out, both as a result of the leadership role that Canada played in promoting progress and consensus and as a result of these elements representing for us the most important and beneficial achievements of the Uruguay round. I refer to the market access package, to the agreement on subsidies and countervailing duties which grew out of a Canadian draft, and to the agreement to establish a new institution, the World Trade Organization, with a greatly strengthened and integrated dispute settlement system. The creation of the World Trade Organization is largely the result of a joint initiative by Canada and the European union.

Under the Uruguay round agreement access to markets for industrial products will be substantially improved with most tariffs being cut by at least one-third. Deeper cuts including zero tariffs in some 10 sectors will also be made. Overall, Canadian exports to the European union for example will benefit from tariff reductions of almost 60 per cent. To take another example, tariffs on our exports to Japan will be reduced by about 70 per cent.

The impact of tariff escalation will also be reduced. For example the gaps between tariffs on finished products and raw materials will fall by as much as two-thirds for products of importance to Canada such as copper, lead, zinc, and other non-ferrous metals.

A major achievement of the Uruguay round is that for the first time the agricultural sector is brought under the rules based multilateral trade regime. Agricultural tariffs will be cut overall by 36 per cent with domestic support measures to be reduced by 20 per cent and export subsidies by 36 per cent in terms of budgetary expenditures over a six year period. This represents a significant gain for Canadian agricultural exporters. More generally the agricultural reforms will contribute to improving efficiency in the world economy, providing a good start for future disciplines particularly on agricultural export subsidies.

Also for the first time trade in services and trade related intellectual property are brought within the framework of the multilateral trade disciplines. The agreement on services covers trade and investment worth some $2 trillion annually and will promote continuing liberalization in these sectors. Multilateral rules on intellectual property will provide a stronger basis for the development and transfer of technology. Agreements in areas as diverse as rules of origin, import licensing and pre-shipment inspection will improve conditions for all international traders.

As I already mentioned the agreement strengthens trade remedy rules, thus realizing one of Canada's priority objectives on going into the Uruguay round some seven and a half years ago. The agreement defines the concept of subsidy for the first time in a multilateral trade agreement. Further, it sets out criteria exempting certain subsidies for regional development, research and development, and the environment from countervailing measures. In this era of fiscal constraint, Canada will benefit from the strengthening of multilateral disciplines on subsidies that can have such an adverse effect on our competitive position in both domestic and foreign markets.

Although the Uruguay round agreement does contain some improvements with respect to anti-dumping measures, we shall have to go further to ensure that such measures are not used in the future as an instrument for continuing protectionism.

The agreement effectively precludes unilateral measures in responding to trade disputes. The new integrated dispute settlement system, one with clearer rules, tighter deadlines and for the first time an appeal process with binding effect is a major improvement over the existing GATT system. In the final analysis rules after all are only as effective as the means of enforcing them. This wholesale reform of the multilateral trade dispute settlement system therefore can represent an important if unquantifiable benefit for the small and medium size trade players like Canada which are inherently vulnerable to the threat of unilateralism by the economic giants.

Without a doubt the crowning achievement however of the Uruguay round is the creation of the new World Trade Organization that will replace the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Such a new organization is indispensable in overseeing the operation of the complex series of agreements and other instruments resulting from the Uruguay round. It will also provide for greater political surveillance of the system by trade ministers in coming years.

The new World Trade Organization will finally put international trade on a firm institutional footing by becoming the third pillar of the world's commercial and financial structure, along with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

As a successor to the GATT, the World Trade Organization will provide the forum for future trade negotiations aimed at further trade liberalization world wide and the development of new global trade rules.

All parts of Canada, all regions, most sectors of our economy will reap substantial benefit from the Uruguay round agreements. The business and agricultural communities as well as the provinces were closely consulted throughout the course of the seven years and more of negotiation. It is in no small part due to their contributions that these agreements will provide real tangible benefits for Canadian producers and consumers in all regions.

Elimination of tariffs for example on paper and allied products and lower tariffs on lumber will substantially improve access to the European union and Japanese markets for our forest products industry, particularly in British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec and the Atlantic provinces.

The reduction in tariffs and non-tariff barriers in Europe, Japan and Korea, although more limited than we would have wished, will enhance the export competitiveness of our fish products based in Atlantic Canada and British Columbia.

The agreement will produce a more market oriented and global trading environment for our agricultural sector. The reduction in export subsidies and in the volume of subsidized exports will put our field crops, particularly grains and oilseeds from our prairie provinces, on a more equal footing with those of our principal competitors.

At the same time, supply management will be able to continue operating as an effective Canadian approach to producing and marketing dairy and poultry products. The Uruguay round agreement allows for the continuation of supply management through high import tariffs that will maintain a real security for these sectors.

New rules and disciplines on sanitary and phytosanitary measures will improve prospects for exports of many Canadian agricultural and forest products.

The reduction and harmonization at lower rates of tariffs for chemicals and chemical products will improve access to world markets especially in Asia and Latin America for our producers concentrated in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Quebec.

Sectoral free trade for pharmaceuticals will result in lower import costs and improved market access and will enhance exports to offshore markets, particularly from Quebec and Ontario. Improved protection for intellectual property will enhance prospects for investment and for research and development.

The Canadian communications and electronic equipment industries concentrated in Quebec and Ontario will benefit from the substantial reduction of tariffs in important industrialized markets. Software and computer service exports will be facilitated by the agreements on services and trade related intellectual property.

Canada has many strengths in the services sector that will benefit from increased global market opportunities brought about by the new General Agreement on Trade and Services. Services in which Canada is competitive internationally include various professional and management consulting services, technical testing, financial, computer and environmental services, telecommunications, air transport, tourism, commercial education and training, health related services, maintenance and repair, and services incidental to agriculture, mining, forestry, energy and manufacturing.

Increased clarity and discipline in the use of multilateral trade rules, particularly countervailing duties as well as more effective dispute settlement mechanisms, will provide greater security of access for Canadian products in many markets. Canadian products that have in the past suffered harassment from countervail actions that can expect more secure access as a result of the agreement include lumber, fish, pork and magnesium.

In addition, new rules under the Uruguay round agreement on subsidies provide for the possibility of taking action against subsidized products that displace Canadian products in foreign markets, including those of the subsidizing country. These provisions alone can be a real benefit to Canadian manufacturers of civil aircraft and ground transport equipment, steel and steel products and other sectors that have often been heavily subsidized by foreign governments.

As a country that stands to benefit greatly from these agreements, Canada has insisted that our principal partners fully implement their Uruguay round obligations by legislating them

into domestic law. We paid particular attention to the United States implementing of legislation. We were in frequent touch with the American authorities at the highest level. We urged them to ensure that the United States legislation faithfully reflects the international agreements.

We are satisfied that the United States legislation now awaiting vote in Congress while not perfect, substantially implements the Uruguay round agreements. All of our principal trading partners are now in the process of moving their legislation forward. We are currently reviewing the European union and Japanese implementing bills, which have just been tabled. While none of our major partners has yet completed the legislative processes, it appears probable that they will in fact do so in time to bring the agreements into force and to establish the new World Trade Organization two months or so hence on January 1, 1995.

It is important that Canada play its part and give a clear signal to the world community that we intend to complete our domestic procedures and implement these agreements into Canadian law in time for the January 1 start-up. However, we shall keep a close eye on the course of the legislative process in Washington, Tokyo and the European union.

We do not intend to complete our legislative procedures until we see how events unfold elsewhere. Accordingly, we shall proclaim our legislation only after our principal partners have obtained their necessary legislative approval.

With the exception of Germany, Canada is more dependent on international trade for its economic well-being than any of the other G-7 countries. Canadians understand that our domestic market is too small to generate alone the level of prosperity we enjoy.

It behoves Canadians to make a contribution to the functioning of the international trading system proportionate to our interest in the system itself. That is why Canada played a key role in the seven years or more of negotiations that led to the agreement to establish the new World Trade Organization which will replace the GATT on January 1. That is why we are now playing a leadership role in the complex, detailed, preparatory work required to get the new World Trade Organization up and running.

We in Canada are committed to completing as soon as possible the unfinished work of the Uruguay round in such areas as government procurement, financial and telecommunications services. We are also committed to beginning work on that new generation of trade policy issues including such matters as the relationship of international trade to the environment, to competition policy, to investment and to labour standards. We intend to help shape the agenda and basic concepts at an early stage so that future negotiations will advance Canadian interests.

Canada's economic strength now and in the future will depend fundamentally on our willingness to stay on the leading edge of freer trade, to continue to take an active and creative role in forging new relationships and in building new structures that over time can extend the reach of a rules-based international order.

The multinational system centred on the World Trade Organization will be the foundation of that international order but it is not the only element of what is and must be a complex and constantly evolving trade order.

We must harness for positive ends the profound forces pushing us all toward deeper economic integration. Today it is more accurate to speak not of trade policy as such but of international economic policy. Jurisdictions and policy areas that have long been considered to be quintessentially domestic are now increasingly subject to international negotiations and rule making.

The old trade policy issues of tariff and non-tariff barriers remain on the table but they are being overtaken by a new agenda: concerns over investment policy, regulatory regimes, intellectual property, competition law and even international monetary policy, a trend which in turn reflects the evolution of a yet more globally integrated world economy.

If we accept that economic security inevitably lies in deepening our commitment to open rules based trade, then the issue is really no longer whether we should surrender sovereignty but how we take a leading role in building a new kind of sovereignty to reflect a new economic order.

The reality is that Canada cannot wait for the international community to provide the institutions of mechanisms that will ensure our economic security. Multilateralism while remaining our first option cannot remain our only option. For Canada, this means taking a yet more active and creative role in forging additional relationships and in building new structures that can over time extend the reach of rules based trade.

This was the original justification for the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement and the subsequent North American Free Trade Agreement. It was really just that, to push forward in areas where our degree of economic integration seemed to call for a deeper, more comprehensive, more expeditious regime of rules and procedures than the GATT itself could provide.

It is Canada's goal to extend this deeper free trade relationship throughout the western hemisphere and beyond, regionally if possible, bilaterally if necessary. We are already engaged in the negotiation of bilateral investment agreements with some international partners. We shall have to consider the negotiation of bilateral trade agreements if other avenues forward should become blocked.

Although the negotiation and implementation of NAFTA has focused Canada's attention in recent years southward to the rest of our hemisphere, we must also begin to explore additional means of expanding our trade relations eastward, across the Atlantic to Europe and westward across the Pacific to Asia.

The momentum for trade liberalization both in the western hemisphere and around the world is strong. Canada seeks to maintain that momentum. Accordingly I shall convene a meeting of the trade ministers of Japan, the United States and the European union here in Canada this spring.

We shall strive to develop a consensus for new common trade initiatives that will be considered at the G-7 summit next June in Halifax.

In submitting this bill today to the House for approval, the government counts on the consensus of all parties in this House that the cornerstone of trade policy is a multilateral system of mutually agreed market access conditions and non-discriminatory trade rules applicable to all that free, fair and open trade is essential for the future of the Canadian economy and for securing the competitiveness and long-term sustainable development of Canada and that trade expansion contributes to job creation, achieves higher standards of living, offers greater choice to consumers and strengthens the Canadian economic union. Such are the objectives that the bill before us today seeks to promote.

I invite members from each side of the House to join in considering its provisions, its purposes and ensuring its timely adoption.

World Trade Organization Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

3:30 p.m.

Bloc

Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Verchères, QC

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity today to speak on second reading of Bill C-57, an Act to implement the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization. On April 15 in Marrakesh, Morocco, the 125 signatories to the General Agreement on Tariff and Trade, commonly referred to as GATT, finally signed the agreement that finalized the lengthy negotiations of the Uruguay Round, which had taken nearly eight years.

Later on, I will elaborate somewhat on the process that led to the conclusion of this agreement and on the various stages of the Uruguay Round. By signing the Marrakesh agreement, member countries created the World Trade Organization, which is to replace GATT from now on. However, implementing the various provisions of this agreement and the tariff tabled by Canada in February will require a number of adjustments to existing legislation.

The bill before the House today is essentially concerned with consequential amendments to existing legislation. Part I of the bill covers the ratification of the agreement, identifies the positions of Canadian representatives with the various bodies of the World Trade Organization, determines the payment of Canada's contribution towards the operating expenses of the World Trade Organization and contains provisions for suspending concessions the agreement allows in specific cases.

Part II of the bill, which is also the most substantial part, amends certain acts to reflect the obligations contained in the agreement, and as a result, many existing acts will be amended by this bill. These include, for instance, the Bank Act, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act, the Canadian Wheat Board Act, the Canada Cooperative Associations Act, the Copyright Act, the Customs Act, the Export and Import Permits Act, the Financial Administration Act, the Investment Canada Act, the Investment Companies Act, the Meat Import Act, the Patent Act, the Special Import Measures Act, the Trade-marks Act, the Trust Companies Act, the Loan Companies Act and the Western Grain Transportation Act.

Part III deals with the coming into effect of this bill, showing the extent of the ramifications and implications this bill will have in our everyday life. In this regard, it is obvious that the significant changes brought about by trade liberalization are likely to raise a number of concerns in certain circles. The changes made in international trade rules are undoubtedly bound to result in a restructuring of the various national economies and certain economic sectors are more affected than others.

But apart from these structural adjustments, which are temporary and transitional, we must recognize that trade liberalization presents us with to formidable challenges and note the remarkable adaptability demonstrated so far by the various sectors of our economy as well as the vitality shown by Canadian and Quebec businesses in the face of market expansion.

Trade liberalization forces us to become competitive. We must rely on those areas where we excel, occupy new market niches, put the emphasis on value-added products and, consequently, invest massively in research and development as well as put in place coherent and efficient vocational training and manpower adjustment policies.

The establishment of the World Trade Organization will result in the strengthening and hastening of the planetary trade liberalization movement. There is every indication that it will soon be joined by new members, some of which, like China, show a major potential for economic development.

Needless to say that we will be supporting this bill, since it is intended to implement an