Bill C-4 (Historical)

Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation Act

An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican States

This enactment implements the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican States, done at Buenos Aires on November 30, 2018, as amended by the Protocol of Amendment to that Agreement, done at Mexico City on December 10, 2019.
The general provisions of the enactment set out rules of interpretation and specify that no recourse is to be taken on the basis of sections 9 to 20 or any order made under those sections, or on the basis of the provisions of the Agreement, without the consent of the Attorney General of Canada.
Part 1 approves the Agreement, provides for the payment by Canada of its share of the expenditures associated with the operation of the institutional and administrative aspects of the Agreement and gives the Governor in Council the power to make orders in accordance with the Agreement.
Part 2 amends certain Acts to bring them into conformity with Canada’s obligations under the Agreement.
Part 3 contains the coming into force provisions.

Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement Implementation Act

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, we will not rewrite history. It is true that the member's party almost jeopardized both the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the European Union and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.

My colleague said that if he were in opposition he would probably be saying that improvements could be made. However, my response to him is that I am in opposition and we certainly would not have done any worse than the Liberals did.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for that great speech.

I am pleased to see that the Conservatives recognize the importance of protecting aluminum. That makes me very happy, and I thank them for that. All parties need to work together.

In fact, we invited the member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord to join us when we all got going on this in December. He agreed to join us then and got to meet with Ms. Néron and the other participants. We were the ones who invited them, organized their press conference, and let them meet here in the House of Commons. We invited the member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord to that too, but he did not come, unfortunately.

My question for my hon. colleague is this: Are there partisan reasons why the member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord is no longer interested in joining us? If not, can we count on him to help us protect our workers?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, not only can Quebeckers and the people of Saguenay—Lac-St-Jean and Chicoutimi count on the member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord to stand up for them, but they can also count on him to play a leadership role with the co-operation of the Bloc Québécois, of course.

The member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord is a strong supporter of the aluminum industry. He has been talking about this from the beginning. I would only urge my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean to ask the member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord the question directly, rather than asking me.

The only answer I can give him is that the member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord is a strong supporter of aluminum and that we can be proud of his work.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am the representative for North Island—Powell River, and we have multiple dairy farms in our communities. One of the challenges for small, rural, remote communities is when industries are attacked through trade agreements, and we see a huge decline of resources to those communities. One of the things I love about supply management is that it protects these family-owned businesses and it protects those communities.

I would like to hear the member's opinion on supply management and how much more our dairy farmers can take with trade agreements like this one.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, the government should not touch supply management in any upcoming free trade agreements. No new concessions should be made. That is the reality. Supply management protects all the small farms in my riding. I am obviously a proud supporter of supply management.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

Before I recognize the next speaker, I want to advise members that we are now at the time when we are transferring over to 10-minute speeches as opposed to 20-minute speeches. Unfortunately, at some point I will have to interrupt the member because we are going to run out of time. He will be able to continue his speech tomorrow if this matter is before the House.

Resuming debate, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment]

Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise in the House today for my first speech and to speak to the Canada-United States-Mexico agreement. Some people call it CUSMA. In my home riding of Windsor—Tecumseh, we simply call it the new NAFTA. Either way, this trade agreement spells certainty and job security for the 40,000 manufacturing workers and 8,000 agriculture workers in our region, whose companies rely on open and reliable access to the U.S. market.

Two billion dollars in trade crosses the U.S.-Canada border each day, and one-quarter of that trade crosses the Windsor-Detroit border. More than just market access, the new NAFTA means every car made in North America will have 25% more local content. That means more production, more jobs and greater prosperity for our region.

Members should not just take my word for it; the president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association said that the new NAFTA is “the single biggest boost to the fortunes of the Canadian auto supply sector in our history.” That is why I urge my colleagues in the House to move swiftly and resolutely on ratifying this important trade deal.

I also want to talk about another key aspect of the new NAFTA that would help tilt the playing field even further in favour of Canadian workers like those in Windsor—Tecumseh, and that is the new labour chapter.

Through the new labour chapter, the agreement seeks to improve working conditions and living standards across North America and to protect and enhance basic workers' rights. Trade and labour protections are mutually supportive, and Canada strives to demonstrate internationally that a competitive economy includes safe, healthy and co-operative workplaces. The labour chapter in this new agreement aims to raise and improve labour standards and working conditions in all three countries by building on international labour principles and rights.

The original NAFTA includes a side agreement on labour called the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation. This new labour chapter is a significant improvement over the original side agreement and is fully incorporated into the new NAFTA. The new labour chapter includes commitments to protect and promote internationally recognized labour principles and rights, including the International Labour Organization's 1998 Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. Most importantly, these commitments are all subject to dispute settlement.

The chapter also includes commitments to ensure that national laws and policies provide protection of the fundamental principles and rights at work, including the right to freedom of association and to collective bargaining. The chapter also includes a non-derogation clause that prevents parties from deviating from their domestic labour laws in order to encourage trade or investment.

Importantly, the new labour chapter has a number of key provisions that support the advancement of fair and inclusive trade. For instance, it includes enforceable obligations to address issues related to migrant workers, forced or compulsory labour, and violence against union members. To address labour rights violations in Mexico, it also includes an annex with specific requirements on worker representation in collective bargaining.

I mentioned the issue of forced or compulsory labour, an odious practice that still exists in many countries. The Canada-United States-Mexico agreement is the very first agreement to include an obligation that would commit Canada as well as the United States and Mexico to prohibit the importation of goods produced by forced labour. This is a milestone provision that could have an important impact on workers around the globe.

Let me give some context.

The ILO estimates that in 2016, approximately 25 million people worldwide were subjected to forced labour, and a disproportionate number were women and young girls. For this reason, our government has committed to addressing forced labour within the labour chapter of the agreement.

While these inclusive trade provisions would largely help workers outside of Canada, the modernized agreement would also help workers here at home. “How, exactly?” one may ask. North American free trade has been an enormous benefit to Canadian businesses, workers and the overall economy. It means more good-quality jobs here at home and more affordable goods and services. The agreement would ensure that trade does not come at the expense of workers' labour rights.

Ultimately, trade is about people. It is about creating the best possible conditions for growth, for jobs and for the prosperity of individuals and working families in their communities.

Let me give an example of how the CUSMA would protect Canadian interests and help to curb the outflow of jobs.

The rules of origin chapter addresses automotive manufacturing wages in North America by including a labour value content requirement. Basically, this means that 40% of the value of a vehicle must be from a plant where the workers earn an average of $16 U.S. per hour or more in order for the vehicle to be considered as originating from a CUSMA country.

This provision, together with the labour chapter provisions on collective bargaining rights, may create upward pressures on wages in Mexico and help to level the playing field for Canadian workers and businesses.

It is important to note that the labour chapter is subject to the dispute settlement chapter in cases of non-compliance to ensure that all obligations are respected. The agreement provides an opportunity for governments to take the necessary actions and measures if prior attempts to resolve the matter through consultations prove ineffective.

The labour chapter allows for complaints from members of the public, including businesses and unions, in cases of non-compliance.

When Canada, the United States and Mexico agreed to further strengthen the labour chapter of the agreement on December 10, 2019, Canada established a new bilateral rapid response mechanism with Mexico that allows Canada to request an investigation into certain labour rights violations by an independent panel of labour experts. This mechanism will ultimately hold covered facilities accountable for the commitments on workers' rights.

The labour chapter is a significant improvement on the original NAFTA side agreement on labour. This robust and comprehensive chapter will bolster existing protections for workers. Workers at home and around the world will benefit from the Canada-United States-Mexico agreement and enjoy better labour standards for years to come.

Let us get this deal ratified.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member will have three minutes and 20 seconds the next time this matter is before the House should he choose to finish his speech and take questions and comments.

The House resumed from January 30 consideration of the motion that Bill C-4, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican States, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am here today to speak to the trade agreement now before the House. I have had opportunities in the last few days to stand in the House, but this is my first speech.

I would like to thank all the people in my riding who helped me in being elected to serve in the House for a second term. When we have an election, it is amazing how many people come forward to volunteer, and they do so much significant work in the community.

I also want to thank my family members who supported my being here today, especially my sister Mary. Even though she has three small children to care for, she flew in to spend the last few days of the election with me. It meant a lot to have her there.

However, I also want to acknowledge all the volunteers for every party. At the end of the day, democracy is fundamental to our country. It is important to acknowledge all the people who volunteered and spent time working very hard for their candidates.

I have some concerns about this agreement and I am torn on this issue. I recognize the importance of trade to our country and to its economic success. We live in a global economy, but I have a lot of concerns about how that works.

The U.S. is Canada's most significant trading partner. It is our friend and our neighbour. We have some political challenges with the U.S. at certain times, but there is a lot of back-and-forth between our two countries. Therefore, trying to find ways to work with the Americans is important.

However, at the end of the day, trade needs to focus on fairness. We need to have trade that assures all Canadians are respected throughout the process.

I live in a rural and remote community. North Island—Powell River is just under 60,000 square kilometres. There are several ferries. It is both on Vancouver Island and on the mainland. One of the things that worries me in our trade process, and I will talk about the transparency of that process, is we often forget some of our rural and remote communities and the challenges they face when we do not think about trade through that lens.

My riding has several dairy farms. When we look at what has been happening with the past several trade agreements, supply management is struggling. From my perspective, supply management is really under attack. I understand that there are challenges when we trade, but supply management is so important. It assures all Canadians of a good product in which they can trust. I encourage people to check out a Canadian dairy farm. It is an amazing thing. It is a lot more healthy and wonderful than one thinks, and we can trust that product.

Protecting rural and remote communities is key. Supply management allows us to have robust farms that are small and local, that provide local jobs, not only on the farms but in the services they use, and that is important.

Viewfield Farms, Daldas Farms and Lloydshaven farm are in my riding. Those farms are a big part of our community. Not only do they employ people at their farms and create amazing products, but they also access the services around them to care for their farms, their milk products and their cows.

When we look at the negotiations that have taken place on supply management, under CUSMA, CPTPP and CETA, we see that about 10% of the market share has been taken away from those sectors, which makes it harder for those farms. I hope we do not want more focus on centralization. That takes away from those small rural and remote communities and starts to build in larger centres. Therefore, this is important.

The other thing that worries me is that this trade agreement contains a provision that would grant the U.S. oversight into the administration of the Canadian dairy system. It undermines Canada's sovereignty and our ability to manage our product. When we look at the product produced in the U.S., we need to be concerned about it. We know that the American dairy sector uses bovine growth hormone, which increases milk production up to 25%. There are no studies on what that does to people when they consume these products.

We know it is really bad for the cows. They suffer from more stress and there is a higher incidence of udder infections, swollen legs and premature death. It should be very concerning when that product is coming across our borders. Canadians need to know what the product is. As I said earlier, those who go to Canadian farms will feel good about eating dairy products. Farmers take care of their cows.

Another important area for me, especially in this day and age, is environmental protections and addressing issues like climate change. When there are trade discussions, Canada has an important opportunity to reflect on how it is doing with respect to its climate change actions, on which we need to do a lot better. However, it is also an opportunity to negotiate with other countries to increase their accountability. I want to see more trade agreements in which provisions around the environment and climate change are binding and fully enforceable. We do not see that in this agreement.

The provisions should also focus on and be in line with Canada's international obligations. When we look at the Paris Agreement, we do not see that reflected. When I look at this trade agreement, it really does not help us move forward toward those important environmental climate change targets.

I have another frustration. I remember being in this place in the spring of last year, talking about ratifying this agreement. Again and again, the NDP asked why the government was rushing this, that we needed to ensure the U.S. Democrats in Congress had an opportunity to do their work on this deal, that they would make it a better deal, and that happened. However, we kept hearing that it was the best deal we could get. Then the government would go back to the table and come back again, saying it was a better deal.

It is important for the government to understand it has an obligation to get the best deal it can, to take every action it can to ensure Canadian workers are cared for, that we are respectful of workers in other countries, that we look at how it will impact our businesses and economy, what it looks like in urban settings and in rural and remote settings. I am glad the work was done, but it is frustrating to keep having this conversation.

I am very pleased that chapter 11, the investor-state dispute settlement of NAFTA, is finally gone. When we look at the history of the country, Canada was sued repeatedly, and this mechanism kept us in a vulnerable position. I am glad it is gone.

However, I am also concerned about some of the language I see in the agreement that leads me to believe some of those things are entwined in the language. We will have to watch that carefully, and we should be concerned about it.

At the end of the day, though, one of my biggest frustrations on all trade agreements is the lack of transparency of the negotiation process. It needs to be addressed, and I hope that is fixed soon.

Canadians across the country need to understand what we are negotiating and why. As I said earlier, I represent three dairy farms in my riding, and one thing they wanted to know was how much supply management quota we were giving away. They were frustrated by the lack of communication and clarity around this very important issue.

We have a huge country with a lot of diverse economies. We also have a lot of rural and remote communities, like mine, that are struggling as we adjust to this changing world and changing economy. We need to ensure that trade recognizes this and looks at how we can work collaboratively to ensure those folks are not left behind in these discussions.

I call on the government to understand that we need a more transparent process. I understand that when we are negotiating something, we do not want to lay all our cards on the table publicly. However, there still was not enough information that allowed different sectors in our communities across Canada to express their concerns and ensure that those voices were heard. Even in the states, Trump was very clear about his goals, so we need to hear the goals of government.

I look forward to having further discussions. I am excited for the bill go to committee, where we can study these issues more fully.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member talked about the dairy industry.

First, why should poor families in Canada have to pay higher prices for dairy for their children?

Second, when we close our markets, how can we ask other countries to open their markets for agriculture exports?

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am a little concerned about the fact that the member does not seem to fully understand what supply management is. He also does not seem to support it. It is not exactly what I thought I would hear from that side of the House.

I want to be really clear. In Canada, we have, through our supply management system, a really strong dairy sector that is reliable and strong. We know what we are getting in that product. The cost of our dairy is very reasonable. It is a great relationship between ensuring we have fair prices and providing stability and support for those businesses that are often held by families for generation after generation.

I am going to come back to the good, healthy product we have. We know what is in our dairy products, and that is really important.

I am a little concerned that side of the House, which says it supports supply management, seems to have a different opinion.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech and I congratulate her on her election.

Seeing as we both come from ridings with major dairy businesses, I would like to hear her speak again about how CUSMA opens up a new breach in supply management. The agreement gives up more than 3% of our dairy market, which amounts to a loss of about $150 million a year, every year. Furthermore, the government announced that farmers would be fully compensated, but we still do not know what that compensation will look like.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, I apologize for not responding in the member's first language, French. I am working on it, but it is taking me a long time.

This is an important part of the reality for our dairy farmers across the country. I want to be really clear. I am not sure about the dairy farmers in her riding, but the dairy farmers in my riding have said that they will take the compensation if they have to. However, what they really want is just to do their job and to provide a good product, and not have their quota moved all the time.

That does raise a lot of concern. How is that compensation going to come back to those businesses? How is that going to roll out? Is it going to be continuous? How are we going to ensure that those dairy farmers have the opportunity to be strong and well funded in their own right? This is a concern.

As I said earlier, in small, rural and remote communities, we need these dairy farms. They assure us of a good product. They do all the things in which I think Canadians really believe. We need to ensure we protect them. Compensation helps, but it is not the last solution. Hopefully we will see something from the government soon, because they deserve it.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, most of the premiers of the provinces welcome this agreement.

I would like to ask the member a question.

Can she deny that the signing of this agreement adds a level of certainty to our Canadian economy? Can she deny that the agreement commits to protecting our environment, air quality and marine pollution? Can she deny that the agreement recognizes the gender identity, sexual orientation and diverse genders of all persons here in Canada? Can she deny that under the new agreement, we will no longer have to pay customs at the border on Canadian dairy products, eggs and poultry?