Debates of May 17th, 2006

Serge Ménard Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Mr. Speaker, his counterpart in Quebec has asked that he reverse his decision and leave the registry in place.

Will the minister respond favourably to this request from the Government of Quebec?

Stockwell Day Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, my office and I were pleased to receive a call from the minister for the beautiful Province of Quebec.

I can tell him that we are going to consult the provinces. I can also assure the minister that we will continue to require safe storage of firearms, safety training, a police check and registration of handguns. I will be consulting with the minister.

Serge Ménard Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Mr. Speaker, the minister is also announcing that the RCMP will be responsible for managing the registry from now on.

Does the government intend to propose to the Government of Quebec that the Sûreté du Québec take on this responsibility in Quebec, with an appropriate budget transfer, especially since the Sûreté du Québec believes in the need for the national firearms program and reports to a minister who also believes in the program?

Stockwell Day Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what will happen. I will consult with the minister on this, because the Sûreté du Québec has ideas, of course, and I will consult its representatives. I am in favour—we are all in favour—of effective gun control.

Ken Boshcoff Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON

Mr. Speaker, two major Canadian lumber industry groups have filed lawsuits against both the Government of Canada and the government of the United States. They state that the two governments are preventing Canadian private industry from finalizing the decision of the NAFTA panel that has found that Canadian softwood is not subsidized. That decision should be final and recognized. All duties which have been collected must be returned.

Why will the Prime Minister not stand up for Canadian companies and why did he give away what they had already won under NAFTA?

David Emerson Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should be prepared to go to his community, where the softwood lumber industry has been on its back for the last five years, and say that he wants more years of litigation and that he wants to cast aside a negotiated settlement that will bring stability, job growth, investment and a sense of a future for the softwood lumber industry across Canada and in northern Ontario.

Ken Boshcoff Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON

Mr. Speaker, who does he think asked me to ask the question?

It is absolutely shameful that a Canadian company needs to sue its own government to protect our legal rights. The United States has not yet abandoned any of its litigation. Our industries are still paying $40 million a month in duties. Many are totally tapped out of capital financing and on the brink of bankruptcy. It is another stab in the back.

The Speaker Peter Milliken

I am afraid the hon. member's time has expired. The hon. the Minister of International Trade.

David Emerson Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics

Mr. Speaker, I think the lawyers were probably the ones who got him to ask the question.

Hundreds of millions of dollars have spent on legal fees in this action. This negotiated settlement was very much in the interests of the Ontario forest industry and the forest industry across the country.

We have not given up our legal rights. We have merely suspended the extraordinary challenge. It can be continued, if this negotiation is not completed.

Dominic LeBlanc Beauséjour, NB

Mr. Speaker, a NAFTA panel was preparing to confirm that Canadian softwood lumber is not subsidized just before the government capitulated to the Americans. Now, our industry must sue its own government in order to ensure compliance with NAFTA.

Rather than making the Canadian industry the priority by giving it a legal footing within NAFTA, the Prime Minister and his Minister of International Trade approved everything and abandoned everything. Why?

David Emerson Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics

Mr. Speaker, as I said to the previous question, we have not given up our legal rights. We have negotiated a settlement. We have protected Canadian forest policy. We have, if anything, protected Canadian sovereignty.

We have an agreement from the United States not to launch further aggressive trade actions. Those hon. members, with their cheap partisan politics, are inviting us to go back into a trade war, to go back into litigation, to go back into uncertainty, to go back into unemployment and to go back to destroying the softwood lumber industry.

Dominic LeBlanc Beauséjour, NB

Mr. Speaker, it was established some time ago that the minister knows nothing about partisan politics.

Despite veiled threats to the provinces and industry, Ontario softwood producers have been cut loose in their fight to see free trade respected. It seems that the government is more interested in playing the role of butler to the U.S. industry than protecting Canadian jobs and ensuring our industry can compete in the future.

Why did the government gut NAFTA and give $500 million to American companies to continue to harass Canadian softwood producers?

David Emerson Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics

Mr. Speaker, I may not know much about partisan politics, but I think know a thing or two about softwood lumber.

The government is dead set on protecting and improving NAFTA, not on destroying it. We have not given up our legal position. We are building on NAFTA. We are re-energizing NAFTA. We are re-energizing the softwood lumber industry in our country.