An Act to amend the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act and to make related amendments to other Acts

This bill was last introduced in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in September 2019.

Sponsor

Jim Carr  Liberal

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment amends the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act in order to implement the Canada – Israel Free Trade Amending Protocol 2018 signed on May 28, 2018.
In order to modernize the text of the Act and by that reflect the amendments brought about by the Protocol, this enactment repeals the preamble to that Act and amends the definition of Agreement, the provision setting out the purpose of the Act and the provisions related to the operation of the institutional and administrative aspects of the Agreement. It also amends that Act in order to confer on the Governor in Council the power to make orders in accordance with the amended Agreement.
Finally, the enactment amends certain Acts to bring them into conformity with Canada’s obligations resulting from the amendments brought about by the Protocol.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

Nov. 7, 2018 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-85, An Act to amend the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act and to make related amendments to other Acts

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 5:55 p.m.
See context

NDP

Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech. In the first part of his speech, he tried to make a clear distinction between the Conservatives and the Liberals. I would group those two parties together and include the NDP, because when it comes to developing trade agreements that enable our business owners to export and grow, we all agree. Where we differ is that the NDP is wondering why we are not using these international treaties as leverage to advance human rights.

The proposed new treaty makes the adoption of corporate social responsibility standards voluntary. The Liberals and the Conservatives take the exact same approach. There are no protections for the people whose resources are being taken.

Have things changed under the new Conservative leadership, or do they still support the same approach taken by Mr. Harper and the previous Liberal government?

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 5:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Trois-Rivières for his interesting question.

Our job as parliamentarians is to improve bills. This evening, I allowed my colleague to share his thoughts on the bill introduced by the Liberals. We are currently at second reading of Bill C-85, and we are debating this bill because we want to make things better. I hope his message was heard.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-85, which implements the new Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement.

Earlier today, the House acknowledged the atrocities suffered by the victims of the Shoah, particularly the passengers of the MS St. Louis. Because of a heartless policy, indisputably motivated by anti-Semitism, Canada prevented these 907 passengers from finding refuge here at home. We all bear some responsibility for what awaited them when they returned to Europe.

Ironically, this afternoon we are discussing Bill C-85 to modernize the free trade agreement between Canada and Israel. In 1939, Jews did not have a country they could consider their own, where they could be confident they would be safe. Maybe that is what made them so vulnerable and almost wiped them from the face of the Earth, victims of the madness of some and the indifference of others. Today, almost 80 years later, they have a prosperous country and we are talking about modernizing a free trade agreement linking Canada and Israel. We have come a long way.

We note that Bill C-85 is not introducing free trade between Canada and Israel. It is updating an agreement that has existed since 1997, so for 22 years. Israel is one of the first countries in the world with which Canada reached a free trade agreement. In terms of trade, Quebec and Israel have a lot in common. Israel is a modern country, one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world, especially in communication and information, and so is Quebec. In any given year, between 40% and 45% of Canada's technology exports originate in Quebec. Also, Israel is a global leader in the electrification of transportation. Quebec is poised to become one. The only thing missing is a little boost from Ottawa.

In those two areas and in many others, there are numerous and logical linkages between Quebec and Israeli companies. That is why we will be supporting Bill C-85 at second reading.

That said, I want to point out an anomaly in the agreement as drafted that must be corrected. Although we are supposed to be debating a free trade agreement between Canada and Israel, that is not what the text states. In fact, this seems to be an agreement with Israel and the occupied territories. By ratifying the agreement as written, Canada would be in some way recognizing that the occupied territories actually belong to Israel. Such a position is in contravention to Canada's foreign policy, international law and the will of the UN Security Council.

To properly understand this point, let us look at the history. In 1947, the United Nations adopted a partition plan in order to create two states in the territory of British Palestine: a Jewish state, which today is Israel, and an Arab state, which would become Palestine. Unfortunately, things were not so simple.

Arab countries rejected the partition plan, war broke out, and to the surprise of many, the Israeli army forced back the Arab forces throughout the territory. It was in this context of war that the State of Israel was created. When the warring parties agreed to the ceasefire in 1949, the international community accepted the ceasefire line as the Israeli border. Palestine, however, was not born. Egypt occupied Gaza while Jordan occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank. There was no peace, however, this was just a ceasefire.

After years of tension, war broke out again in 1967, and Israel, after driving out the Arab armies, began occupying all the Palestinian territory.

Since 1967, the conflict has been frozen. The international community's position has not changed. The State of Israel's territory is what belonged to it in 1949. The rest of the territory it occupies does not really belong to the country. Any change should be the outcome of a bilateral agreement, not a bilateral agreement between Canada and Israel such as the one we are discussing today, but an agreement between Israel and Palestinians.

Canada supports the international consensus. As the Global Affairs Canada website states

:Canada does not recognize Israel's unilateral annexation of East Jerusalem. ...Canada does not recognize permanent Israeli control over territories occupied in 1967.... Israeli settlements in the occupied territories... constitute a serious obstacle to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace.

Canada's position is clear. It is in line with international law, which the Bloc Québécois fully supports.

That is why I mentioned an anomaly earlier. The free trade agreement appears to deviate from that stance. Article 1.7 specifies that Israeli territory is the territory where its customs laws are applied.

An occupied territory is a territory on which laws are imposed and enforced. This is the very meaning of an occupation.

The agreement as is includes the occupied territories, and in particular the settlements. It states that they are part of Israeli territory, which is at odds with Canada's foreign policy.

When the agreement was signed in May, the Minister of International Trade said the following to The Canadian Press: “In international trade law, the way a territory is defined is the physical territory where the customs laws apply.”

However, this does not have to be the case. Europe chose to make its trade policy comply with its foreign policy. Article 83 of the Europe-Israel free trade agreement quite simply states that the agreement applies to the territory of the State of Israel.

There has been no movement in the Israeli conflict, and it is festering. As settlements continue to grow, it becomes increasingly difficult for Israel to put an end to the occupation, and it becomes increasingly difficult to achieve what everyone here in this House wants, which is for the two states to live in peace, side by side, within recognized borders.

The UN Security Council understood that well. It also understood that a provision like the one in the agreement does not promote peace. In resolution 2334, which was passed unanimously in December 2017, the Security Council called on all states to “distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967”.

Quebeckers are friends with Israel, but they are also friends with Palestinians. Above all, they care about peace. That is why, after passing Bill C-85 at second reading, we will ensure this anomaly is corrected.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6:05 p.m.
See context

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, in anticipation that this bill will ultimately be passing, it is encouraging to see the type of support for what I believe is a fantastic piece of legislation. There are some very progressive aspects to the bill.

We have seen a very positive trade agenda from day one with this government. We have highlighted Ukraine, the EU, the comprehensive TPP, and the new trade agreement with the United States and Mexico. The real beneficiary of all of this is Canada's middle class, and those aspiring to be a part of it, from getting into those markets.

We are the only country in the G7 that has these trade agreements with all the other G7 countries. It is a very powerful statement. It is encouraging to see what appears to be virtually unanimous support for the legislation.

I would ask my colleague across the way if he would provide his thoughts on how important it is that we get these trade relations with other countries around the world, because they will enhance opportunities for our businesses, creating great opportunities for job growth here in Canada.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6:10 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and comments.

The Bloc Québécois does indeed recognize the importance of having fair trade deals for all parties. This puts me in mind of former Quebec premier Bernard Landry, who passed away yesterday. He was one of the first people to speak out and say that for Quebec, it is important to get involved in global trade. As he noted, half of what Quebec produces, roughly equivalent to half our economy, is due to our exports.

Quebec is a small, open economy. For us to have so much wealth and so many jobs—I am thinking of our technology shift and our high-tech and high value-added jobs—it is vital to have trade deals with other partners. Half of Quebec's wealth depends on it, so it is very important.

I would remind my colleague, however, that all too often, including in the last three major deals—the one with Europe, the new TPP and the new NAFTA with the U.S. and Mexico—major sectors of the Quebec economy were offered up as bargaining chips without adequate compensation from our point of view and that of Quebec. Obviously, I am talking about our farmers, our dairy producers and other supply managed producers. Breaches were opened in this sector, which is supposed to be protected. There is great inequity, which must be compensated.

However, I am very pleased to have moved a motion in the House that was unanimously adopted. It calls for full compensation for all supply managed producers before the new USMCA is ratified in the House. We will be following this very closely.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague who is from Quebec, as am I. Indeed, Quebec is a nation that is dependent on international trade, as he said. I would like to hear his thoughts on the USMCA and dairy producers.

Two committees are going to be struck, specifically to ensure that dairy producers are adequately compensated and to hear from the sector as a whole. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on the two consultation panels that have been created.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6:10 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Rivière-des-Mille-Îles for her question and her concern for our farmers.

Our farmers do not like being compensated. They tell me that they did not want to be sacrificed in the agreements, but that is what happened to them in the last three agreements. I am pleased to hear today that there are two consultation panels, but unfortunately I fear that the consultations will not end with full compensation for the sacrifices they made in the last three agreements. Nevertheless, it is a very good start. Let us hope that this leads to full compensation and that the House will never again sign trade agreement in which our dairy farmers and other supply managed farmers are sacrificed.

In my speech I announced that we would support this bill at second reading, but that we would propose an amendment to ensure that the land occupied since 1967 is excluded. I would have liked to know whether the Liberal Party members will accept our amendment.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Is the House ready for the question?

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Some hon. members

Question.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Some hon. members

Yea.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

All those opposed will please say nay.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

November 7th, 2018 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Some hon. members

Nay.