International Co-operation  Mr. Speaker, the answer is, yes, I do. We are focused on achieving tangible results for those most in need. We know that the NDP is anti-investment, anti-business and anti-trade. Now we have learned that the NDP is also anti-international development. While the NDP is focused

International Trade   jobs for Canadian workers. Free trade with the EU would bring new opportunities to workers and to their families from coast to coast to coast, including my home province of Ontario. While the anti-trade NDP continues to stand in the way of Canadian exporters, our government

Foreign Investment   decision emanating from dispute resolution would be made public. Despite the fearmongering of the anti-trade critics, the agreement does not impair Canada's ability to regulate and legislate in such areas as the environment, culture, safety, health and conservation. Furthermore

Jobs and Growth Act, 2012   are frightened of that prospect. They are frightened of the fact that the NDP is anti-investment and anti-trade. Canadians deserve better than this radical opposition. Unlike the NDP, our Conservative government will not raise taxes or slash transfers to the provinces. In fact, just today

Foreign Investment  Mr. Speaker, Canadians can count on a government that has a responsible approach. We are open to foreign investment as long as it provides a net benefit to Canada. On the other side of the House, the NDP has a radical and irresponsible anti-investment and anti-trade agenda

Ethics   that the Liberal Party is not beginning to take on the anti-development, anti-trade, anti-energy policies that we see so often in the NDP.

International Trade  Mr. Speaker, that member is simply wrong. Canada's trade deficit narrowed last month and in fact it halved in each of the last two months. The irony is that if the NDP's reckless and irresponsible anti-trade policies were imposed on Canadians, Canada's trade would be zero. Ever

International Trade  Mr. Speaker, I think I have had a bit of an epiphany. I listened closely to the hon. member's language, and really what we are talking about is the fact that the anti-trade party, or the no-trade party, is not at the table. If the New Democrats were at the table, we would

International Trade   opposition to its agenda as anti-trade. On this side of the House we are pro-trade and we await the final draft of the CETA to weigh it in its entirety and see if it is of net benefit to Canada. However, every time we see a leaked draft or document, we see a government

International Trade  %, which is the equivalent of adding 80,000 new Canadian jobs to our workforce. Why is it that the NDP will not support us in doing that? The truth is that the NDP is anti-trade and anti-investment. Only this government stands up for hard-working Canadians.

Foreign Investment   the NDP policy, everything would be lost from the outset, with a $21.5 billion carbon tax and an anti-trade and high-tax agenda. We will not go there.

Foreign Investment  Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable that the opposition is trying to politicize the reviews and the process so that it can impose its radical, anti-trade program, which would make foreign investors flee, whereas foreign investment can make our businesses part of the global value

Foreign Investment  Mr. Speaker, what is not credible is the opposition trying to politicize these reviews. With those members' anti-trade, job-killing agenda, this is what we will not do. What we will do is to evaluate whether these transactions are likely to provide a net benefit for Canada

International Trade   on the NDP to get away from their anti-trade stance and take a pro-trade stance.

International Trade  Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Wild Rose is correct. The NDP's vote against our agreement with Panama was predictable. This is the same party that sent an anti-trade mission to Washington to lobby against Canadian jobs. It is the same party that has consistently opposed our