Pierre Paquette

[Summit Of The Americas, February 14th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I have already told the House that what we need are not briefing sessions, but the basic texts. That having been said, the institutions committee of the Quebec National Assembly is asking “That the final accord of the free trade area of the Americas be submitted to the elected bodies of Canada before being ratified by the federal government”.

Will the government promise, as the U.S congress has done, that the final accord of the free trade area of the Americas will be debated and voted on in the House?

[Summit Of The Americas, February 14th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, despite what the Deputy Prime Minister would have us think, the Bloc Quebecois represents the views shared by all Quebecers with respect to the free trade area of the Americas.

In a unanimous—and I emphasize the term “unanimous”—report, the institutions committee of the Quebec National Assembly is calling on the Government of Canada to periodically report on the progress of negotiations in the sectoral working groups.

How does the government think that Quebecers and Canadians can form an opinion on the validity of the Canadian positions if they do not know what is on the table, if they have not seen the basic texts being negotiated?

[Trade, February 13th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the government is using the fact that Brazil was late in returning its questionnaire to justify its embargo. We now know that the questionnaire has been received. I imagine that, in the meantime, the government has reviewed the questionnaire completed by Brazilian authorities.

Can the minister tell us whether there are significant differences between the answers on this questionnaire and those on the questionnaires completed by Argentina and Uruguay and, if so, what they are? Do these differences justify a total ban on Brazilian beef?

[Trade, February 13th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, to justify his embargo on Brazilian beef, the minister mentioned a questionnaire that was apparently not completed by Brazilian authorities.

Has the minister seen the questionnaire and can he tell the House if he found anything out of the ordinary that would justify his fears and his embargo?

[International Trade, February 12th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think we understand each other properly here. I am not talking about a briefing session. We want to know the contents of the basic text on which they will be negotiating.

We remember how Canada nearly got us into signing an agreement like the multilateral agreement on investment, which everyone now considers a disaster.

Will the government make a commitment that no agreement will be ratified as part of the free trade zone of the Americas negotiations without a debate and vote in this House?

[International Trade, February 12th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has indicated in the House that there has been opposition from other countries about their negotiating position relating to the free trade zone of the Americas being made public. They have a right to that, but the population of Canada and Quebec has the right to know what is being negotiated.

Does the government commit to making public the working texts of the nine sectorial negotiating groups in order to ensure that there is true public debate? Let us be clear. We do not want to know what the others' positions are, nor the Canadian position, just what is on the table, what is going to be negotiated.

[Softwood Lumber, February 7th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the rigid position of the U.S. senate, which we have all read and heard about, is in stark contrast with the minister's optimism, and also with the Prime Minister's optimism following his meeting with President Bush.

How does the Prime Minister explain these warnings on the part of U.S. senators?

[Softwood Lumber, February 7th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, in endorsing the appointment of the new U.S. Secretary of Commerce, Robert Zoellick, U.S. senators have asked him to play hard ball with Canada, particularly in the softwood lumber issue.

Will the Minister for International Trade contact his American counterpart to find out if he shares the senators' view?

[Lumber Industry, February 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I would point out to the minister that in the case of New Brunswick, which does not come under the agreement, growth was much greater.

But, whatever the outcome of the negotiations now under way with the Americans, can the Minister for International Trade guarantee that Quebec lumber producers will never again have to suffer because of subsidies given to other producers, such as those in British Columbia, as has too long been the case?

[Lumber Industry, February 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, thousands of jobs and hundreds of companies in the softwood lumber industry are hard hit by the quotas which have been unfairly imposed on Quebec, while subsidies were being handed out by the Government of British Columbia. Quebec, however, does not offer such subsidies and should not have to suffer as a result.

In the event of American sanctions, will the Minister for International Trade undertake to compensate Canadian and Quebec producers financially and to provide them with legal support before the NAFTA dispute panel?