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 Implementation Act

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

Order. I want to remind members that when a member has the floor, he or she should have the respect of the House. Also, words such as “liar” or “lying” are not allowed in the chamber, so I would remind members to be very mindful about what they say.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, does the member across the way believe that anything has really changed with regard to the negative point of view from a year ago?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, the member must have missed my entire speech. Many have called this agreement “NAFTA 0.5” rather than “NAFTA 2.0” because of its deficiencies.

I understand that the government was put in a bind, but the government ended up capitulating, to use the language of the hon. member, in the deal because of mismanagement. When we had this debate in the last Parliament, I said to the member that his government allowed Mexico and the United States to talk between each other about trilateral relationships specific to NAFTA instead of our being there at the table. We should have been there at that table. We should have done what Mexico did and gotten in with the Americans and had a quick deal. It was an option for the government. The Liberals chose instead to allow Mexico to do that, and we ended up at the short end of the proverbial NAFTA stick.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from the official opposition for sharing his thoughts on the protection of intellectual property.

A few weeks ago, a singer-songwriter from Quebec, Pierre Lapointe, said that for the hundreds of thousands of times his songs played on a certain Internet music platform that shall remain nameless, but whose name starts with “s” and ends with “potify”, he only received a few bucks in royalties.

How does my colleague believe we can protect our artists and their income from these practices on the web?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Quebec for her question.

The existing legislation is precisely what the Government of Canada must address. Artists from Quebec and all of Canada are in a difficult situation.

I hope that the member will read the report from the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage that addresses this topic. I think the government made a mistake, especially when it comes to copyright matters.

It is important that Canadian artists are compensated fairly. The current provisions in this agreement make this that much more difficult.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I congratulate the member for making the effort to answer the question in French.

At this time, I want to say that unfortunately I will have to interrupt the next speaker during his speech. He will be able to continue it the next time this matter is before the House.

Resuming debate, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, our country came together and negotiated hard. With representation at the political level, the civil service level and from many different stakeholders, we achieved a modernization of the free trade agreement between Canada, the United States and Mexico.

By doing that, we have secured the future for literally hundreds of thousands of jobs here in Canada. We have provided a more secure market for the future economy and economic growth of our country. We need to realize that over $2 billion of trade takes place between the United States and Canada every day.

This is an important agreement. What I am saying should not surprise anyone in the chamber because we can see the support it is getting in all regions of our country, in all the different sectors.

Unions, businesses, non-profits and governments of different levels have recognized the significance of the modernization that we have achieved. We have an incredible group of individuals who sat through the negotiations. We have a Prime Minister and a Deputy Prime Minister who were committed to get the job done.

We have built a large base of support among individuals and groups to ensure that Canadians' interests were first and foremost at the table and protected.

A good example of that is supply management. There has been an immense amount of pressure. Whether in this trade agreement or previous trade agreements signed by this government, from dealing with the European Union to the trans-Pacific partnership, protecting Canada's agricultural community, in particular our dairy farmers and other producers, through supply management is something we have been very clear on.

In certain situations there will be some compensation, but let there be no doubt that whether it is supply management or industries that are so vitally important to the many different regions of our country, they have been protected.

The other day when we had the vote on the ways and means budget, I was pleasantly surprised. When the vote was counted, we had Liberals, Conservatives, New Democrats and Green Party MPs standing in favour of this agreement. I recognize that as a very significant achievement. One would have to go a long way back to have that group of political entities voting in favour of a trade pact, if it has ever happened before.

It is a significant achievement. To my friends in the Bloc, I would encourage them. They have raised many concerns, in particular for the aluminum industry. They will see, at second reading, that it is an industry that is protected a lot more than in the original trade agreement between Canada, the United States and Mexico. For the very first time, there are guarantees in place.

If we look at some of those advocates for passage of the legislation, we will see that it includes the Premier of the Province of Quebec, and not only that particular premier but virtually all premiers. I know other premiers, such as Jason Kenney, who have also been quoted in regard to this agreement and the need to see it passed.

As a government there is a reason why we have been so successful at getting well over a million new jobs created in the last four-plus years. We understand how important it is to get public policy right and how it can have the type of desired impact that Canadians want to see.

We see that in the form of tax breaks. We see it in the form of progressive social policies such as the Canada child benefit, the seniors policies and the infrastructure policies.

I would argue that our commitment to expand world trade has been second to none, especially on a per capita basis. Canada is excelling. These are the types of initiatives that are making a difference in the everyday lives of Canadians, no matter where they live in Canada. These are the types of things that help in increasing disposable income, driving our economy and providing more hope for future generations.

When I look at this particular trade agreement, I often think of John Crosbie, who made the comment that he had not really read the deal when we had the original trade agreement with the United States. I have faith and confidence in our negotiations. I have been following the news, much like the other members in opposition and I have had the opportunity to have a great deal of dialogue with stakeholders and others. I am absolutely confident that this is a good deal, and I look forward to continuing my speech on Monday.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member will have three and a half minutes when this matter is before the House again.

The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until Monday at 11 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 2:30 p.m.)

The House resumed from January 31 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.

Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement Implementation Act

[The Speaker, Anthony Rota]

Resuming debate. The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader has three minutes remaining.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I thought I would just emphasize the importance of the legislation that we are debating today. One of the ways to look at the trade agreement between Canada, the United States and Mexico is as a modernization of the free trade agreement. This is something that is really good for workers, businesses and communities across our country.

We need to recognize that Canada is very much dependent on trade. Through trade we are able to continue to support and often lift our middle class. That is something which this government has been very much focused on since taking office back in 2015. We realize that building on Canada's middle class and supporting the middle class is good for Canada's economy. Both areas will benefit.

We have seen that through different approaches dealing with public policy. One of those policy measures is the idea of expanding the economy by securing markets through free trade agreements. I would suggest to members on all sides of this House that our government has been very progressive in moving forward and taking specific actions on free trade agreements.

In fact, in looking at the agreement with the European Union with, I believe it is 28 countries, along with the trans-Pacific partnership and some of the other smaller agreements, such as the trade agreement with Ukraine, the World Trade Organization, and legislation brought forward by this government a few years back, we will see that the government has really recognized the importance of trade. That was reinforced over the weekend for me in the city of Winnipeg where New Flyer recently entered into an agreement to sell and export a number of electric buses to the United States. I believe it is a total of 100 buses, although I could be wrong.

In terms of the actual numbers, the point is that many companies all over Canada very much need those export markets. When it comes to the United States, we are talking about billions of dollars, about $9 billion every day of commerce between our two countries. We have a very strong desire to ensure that we secure those markets. The best way of doing that is to have these trade agreements in place.

What is really nice about this particular agreement is that Canadians, different stakeholders, organizations, non-profits, governments and political parties of all stripes have really been engaged over the last two and half years to ultimately achieve the final product, which is what we are debating today.

I listened very closely to the debate and the concerns that members across the way have expressed, but I think the overall agreement that we have before us is the best agreement that we could have delivered for Canadians. I recognize that opposition parties will always want to believe that they could have done better. I respect that. However, at the end of the day, I believe that what we are presenting through this legislation is the best agreement for Canada and that all Canadians in all regions will benefit directly as a result of it. It was really encouraging to see the Conservatives, the Greens and the New Democrats support the ways and means motion with respect to this legislation.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Madam Speaker, it would be greatly appreciated if the member opposite could name three important areas in this agreement where Canada has won.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, one of our greatest wins by signing this agreement is with respect to supply management. We were able to resist the pressure. Many outside groups would have loved to see the demise of supply management in Canada. Our current Deputy Prime Minister, the Prime Minister and our caucus have been behind supply management for years. I would argue it was a Liberal administration that brought in the system of supply management.

Farmers in all regions of the country are very much supportive of it. We cannot underestimate the pressure we received from U.S. industries and the United States government for us to abandon supply management. I am proud of the fact this agreement continues to ensure that supply management will always be part of the Canadian economy. I see that as the strongest benefit in this agreement. However, that is my personal opinion.

Another win is the fact we have an agreement. This was not an easy thing to achieve given the changes that were being asked for. I believe we are doing exceptionally well with the agreement.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, I listened to what my colleague across the way said. I was reassured to hear that he seems to care about supply management.

However, recent history proves otherwise. The government often promises to protect this system but, every time, it ends up giving up a little chunk. Under this agreement, the local market will lose a total of 18% of the market. That is a lot, and it is starting to hurt our farmers.

Would my colleague agree that it is time to stop throwing roadblocks in the way of this system and protect supply management through legislation? Would he be open to that proposal?