An Act to implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership

Sponsor

Maninder Sidhu  Liberal

Status

Third reading (Senate), as of April 23, 2026

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-13.

Summary

This is from the published bill.

This enactment implements the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, done at Auckland and Bandar Seri Begawan on July 16, 2023, by updating how that Agreement is defined or referred to in certain Acts and by amending other Acts to bring them into conformity with Canada’s obligations under that Agreement and Protocol.

Elsewhere

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

Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-13s:

C-13 (2022) Law An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada's Official Languages
C-13 (2020) An Act to amend the Criminal Code (single event sport betting)
C-13 (2020) Law COVID-19 Emergency Response Act
C-13 (2016) Law An Act to amend the Food and Drugs Act, the Hazardous Products Act, the Radiation Emitting Devices Act, the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, the Pest Control Products Act and the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act and to make related amendments to another Act

Debate Summary

line drawing of robot

This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Bill C-13 facilitates the formal accession of the United Kingdom to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). The legislation updates Canadian laws to incorporate the United Kingdom into this existing free trade agreement, aiming to expand market access and strengthen international economic cooperation.

Liberal

  • Promoting strategic trade diversification: The party emphasizes the need to look beyond the United States for export opportunities, arguing that diversification through agreements like the CPTPP strengthens Canada’s economic sovereignty and security.
  • Strengthening the national economy: Members highlight that the UK’s accession to the CPTPP will support millions of jobs across Canada, particularly in the aerospace, agri-food, and gold sectors, while providing predictability for businesses and investors.
  • Advancing inclusive and values-based trade: The bill is supported for its high standards on labor rights and environmental protection, and its potential to help women entrepreneurs and small businesses access a market of 600 million consumers.
  • Addressing bilateral trade challenges: While supporting the agreement, members acknowledge the need to resolve ongoing disputes regarding beef and pork market access and the lack of pension indexation for British retirees living in Canada.

Conservative

  • Address unfair agricultural barriers: Conservatives criticize the government for failing to use the U.K.’s accession as leverage to remove non-scientific trade barriers on Canadian beef and pork, noting a severe trade imbalance that favors British producers.
  • Protect U.K. pensioners in Canada: The party highlights the government's failure to negotiate cost-of-living adjustments for 100,000 U.K. pensioners living in Canada, arguing that the trade negotiations should have addressed this unfair lack of indexation.
  • Improve domestic economic competitiveness: Members assert that trade deals are only effective if supported by a strong domestic economy. They call for reforms to the tax system, regulations, and infrastructure to reverse capital outflow and declining entrepreneurship.

Bloc

  • Support for UK accession: The Bloc supports the United Kingdom's entry into the CPTPP, arguing that the UK’s post-Brexit trade continuity proves a sovereign nation—like a future independent Quebec—can successfully maintain and renew its international trade partnerships.
  • Demand for greater transparency: The party criticizes the government for tabling the agreement only 15 days after making it public. They advocate for legislation requiring a 21-day waiting period to ensure parliamentarians can properly study complex trade deals.
  • Reciprocity for agricultural products: Members urge the government to negotiate a sanitary and phytosanitary protocol with the United Kingdom to ensure Canadian meat producers gain real market access, addressing non-tariff barriers that currently disadvantage domestic farmers.
  • Criticism of dispute mechanisms: The Bloc opposes investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms, asserting they allow multinational corporations to undermine democratic laws and sue sovereign states over policies intended to protect the environment, social justice, and workers' rights.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:05 a.m.

Bloc

Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC

Madam Speaker, I am going to dig a little deeper into the subject I touched on in my point of order earlier. The Chair did not consider it a point of order, so I imagine this will be fine as a point of debate.

In his speech, the member talked almost exclusively about our relationship with the United States and with the Philippines. He actually had a lot to say about the Philippines. I think it was the topic of almost half of his speech. Honestly, I have nothing against the Philippines. My partner is from the Philippines. However, Bill C‑13 is about the United Kingdom's accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.

The member makes endless speeches in Parliament. He talks about all kinds of things, but I get the impression he is not very familiar with the subject we are discussing today because he did not talk about it. Here is my question for him. Maybe, if he is unfamiliar with a subject, he could give other members who are familiar with it an opportunity to talk because he gets so many opportunities to talk.

What are his thoughts on that?

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:05 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, I do not know if the member is trying to hurt my feelings, but I thought I was very clear. There is a very strong and healthy relationship between the United Kingdom and Canada. I highlighted what I thought was a very important industry from which Canada has benefited immensely, which is the export of gold. If the member wants to challenge that thought, he is welcome to do that. If he wants to highlight other industries, he is welcome to do that also.

Yesterday we talked about the Indonesia trade agreement. There were discussions in regard to an area of trade that I am very much interested in, that being pork. I am surprised at the member opposite, because the pork industry is so important to the province of Quebec. I know that. I would have thought he knew that and would have been interested in hearing me talking about pork, because it matters in Quebec as it matters in the province of Manitoba.

The general gist of my discussion was to talk about how important trade is to Canada. Trade means jobs, whether in B.C., Manitoba, Quebec or Halifax, or up north. That is what we should be talking about: the principles of it. We all know, care and understand the benefits of the EU—

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:05 a.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Riding Mountain.

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:05 a.m.

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Riding Mountain, MB

Madam Speaker, my colleague has brought up a lot of good points about trade, but I am wondering whether, in the trade agreements, there is any commitment to get our own house in order as a nation.

The member referred to the plant in Neepawa. The biggest limiting factor for that plant is the requirement to have veterinarians and to maintain the Canadian national standard. We can make all the promises in the world, travel all over the world and say what we have for sale, but if we cannot get our own house in order, there are big problems. The Canadian agriculture industry has hit these roadblocks several times in the past, putting in question how much of a reliable supplier we are.

In this agreement, is there any commitment to analyze our own Canadian system to help veterinarians and to get our own production systems in line?

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, within this specific agreement, the short answer would be no, not that I am aware of, but I could be wrong on that. At the end of the day, when we look at trade as a whole and what the member is referring to, this is an issue about which I have had discussions with both the Government of Manitoba, in particular the minister of immigration, and federal ministers. Veterinary services play a very important role in our agricultural community.

A question was asked about why we cannot export more pork to Europe. Part of that is about trying to break down some of the barriers, and we are not alone. The pork industry in the United States has the same issue. How do we try to continue to produce in a way that we are very familiar with and work with, and get the EU and the U.K. to accept the pork as we are producing it? That is a challenge in—

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:10 a.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes

Questions and comments.

The hon. member for Québec.

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Jean-Yves Duclos Liberal Québec Centre, QC

Madam Speaker, I was very interested to listen to our colleague's speech and also to compare it to what we heard yesterday on the topic of Indonesia, when we heard some Conservative voices saying that we were spending or wasting too much of members' time talking about trade.

Does the member believe we are spending too much time in the House investing in trade relationships and building a stronger economy?

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question from my colleague because I really and truly believe he, as do I and members of the Liberal caucus, understands the true value of trade. We heard that yesterday during debate on another trade agreement, the Indonesia trade agreement, when Conservatives stood and said there is such a small amount of trade between Canada and Indonesia. I believe they support the agreement, but they were downplaying it because of the amount of trade.

What we are talking about with that particular agreement is billions and billions of dollars in merchandise trade today and how we can continue to enhance that. We want to trade with the world because that is how we are going to build a stronger and healthier Canada and provide jobs into the future.

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:10 a.m.

Bloc

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

Madam Speaker, this debate exposes Parliament's limited ability to amend treaties. Amendments can be made only to the bill and not to the treaty itself.

In the United States, the U.S. Congress grants negotiating mandates, making it more difficult for negotiating teams to conclude unsatisfactory agreements. In Canada, the executive branch acts alone, without any parliamentary oversight. In most industrialized countries, parliaments adopt treaties. This forces executive branches to maintain an ongoing dialogue and perhaps even reorient negotiations. In other words, Canada has a democratic deficit.

I am running out of time, so I will ask my question. Does my colleague not think that we should review how Canada and Parliament approach treaties, instead of allowing the executive branch to act alone?

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, the short answer is no. The Bloc has tried to bring forward legislation—

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:10 a.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes

We need to resume debate.

The hon. member for Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke has the floor.

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask for unanimous consent to split my time with the member for Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford.

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:10 a.m.

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:10 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific PartnershipGovernment Orders

March 12th, 2026 / 11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise on behalf of the cattle producers in the farm-filled riding of Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke to speak to Bill C-13, an act to bring the United Kingdom into the trans-Pacific partnership.

Canadians who were watching TV in the 1980s may remember a popular Wendy's commercial that asked a simple question, “Where's the beef?” It was such an effective commercial that the slogan became a cultural catchphrase for a lack of substance. For beef producers in my riding and across the country who look at this bill, the question, “Where's the beef?” is quite literal.

For over a decade now, the Liberal government has failed to reach a deal with the United Kingdom to end the unfair treatment of Canadian beef. This bill is our leverage to end the U.K.'s non-tariff barriers on our beef. Currently, the U.K. does not approve of a carcass wash applied at Canadian processing plants. The U.K. also opposes growth promotants in beef or pork production. These objections are not rooted in scientific evidence. They have evolved to keep Canadian products out of the U.K. market.

The results are clear. In 2024, the U.K. exported over $42 million to the Canadian market. That same year, we exported $25,000 in beef to the U.K. That is not free trade. That is not fair trade. This is another Liberal failure.

In the last 360 days, our anglophile Prime Minister has met with the U.K. Prime Minister at least four times. That is not even including their late-night phone calls sharing the latest London gossip. Since the U.K. left the European Union, its five successive prime ministers have been desperately searching for new trade partners. Of all the people we would expect to understand the leverage Canada has over the U.K., we would think it would be the U.K.'s former central banker, yet despite these four meetings and another planned for this weekend, there has been no deal reached to end this unfair treatment.

Maybe all those years living in the U.K. have given our Prime Minister a preference for furry Scottish beef. We can only speculate. After all, it was the Prime Minister who sold himself to Canadians as the ultimate insider, with his central banker superpowers of negotiation, yet despite holding all the cards, he keeps folding. His 24 foreign trips as Prime Minister have been a capitulation carnival. Only one new trade deal has been reached, but do not worry, Canada, we have six new strategic partnerships.

On the Prime Minister's fourth international junket, he signed a new strategic partnership with the European Union. On his sixth trip, he signed a strategic partnership agreement with Poland, which, last we checked, is in fact part of that European Union. On his ninth trip, he signed a strategic partnership with Mexico, Mexico of course being a country that we have two trade deals with, both CUSMA and the trans-Pacific partnership. On his 21st trip, he infamously formed a strategic partnership with the Communists who control China. He even promised this partnership would lead us to a brave new world order. Just this month, he signed a new strategic partnership with Japan.

Unfortunately for my grandsons, there was no promise of a Super Mario World order in that agreement. That we could have a strategic partnership with both China and Japan or with the EU and an EU member is telling. Canadians are right to ask, “Where's the beef?” These fake agreements are all bun and no patty.

The term “strategic partnership” is a major victory for the consultant class. It sounds meaningful, but it signifies nothing. It is the empty suit of international agreements. It is the perfect metaphor for the Prime Minister: all hat and no cattle.

Aside from this bill being a painful reminder of the government's failure to support farmers, it opens another window into the government's latest gaslighting of Canadians. The cynicism of the Liberal Party can be quite shocking at times. It picked a self-professed globalist for its new leader but then ran on an overtly protectionist and national campaign platform while denouncing the protectionist national U.S. President. To much fanfare and fawning headlines, the Liberals announced they were implementing a new buy Canadian policy. Here is what the Prime Minister said during the announcement of this cynical policy: “Canada's public procurement is following outdated rules of free trade order that no longer exists.”

This is another example of how the Prime Minister's soaring rhetoric puts him over his skis. How can he claim that free trade order no longer exists while tabling a bill to expand the free trade order? The bill would bring the United Kingdom into the trans-Pacific partnership trade agreement, but one of the major provisions of this deal is that we cannot have procurement policies that discriminate against companies from partner countries. The Prime Minister knows this very well, yet he is willing to bet that the bought-and-paid-for media will never call him out on this. This is a profound mistake.

What is worse is that the mistake has been made before. The Davos classes learned nothing from the nationalist backlash to globalization. All too often, cynical politicians have used trade agreements as political cover instead of doing the hard work of defending the principle of free trade. The benefits of globalization have not been fairly shared. Those enriched by globalization have used their wealth and privilege to enact policies that make the situation worse. They erect new gates and hire tens of thousands of new gatekeepers to protect the value of their assets. They outsource compassion and charity to the state, freeing up their time to earn more money while workers lose time stuck in traffic, commuting from affordable exurbs such as Arnprior.

It used to be that a single blue-collar worker could provide enough income to own a home and raise a family. Now every family needs two incomes just to cover the Liberal tax bill.

Many of the hard-working Canadians in my riding and in ridings just like it are proud Canadians who will hear the Prime Minister's promise of buy Canadian and believe it. They will believe it right up until the minute they learn that the company they work for was underbid for a government contract by a company in the United Kingdom. That does not just make them lose faith in Liberal politicians. It makes them lose faith in democracy.

The Prime Minister chose a cynical approach because he is a coward. He could not find the courage to defend his beloved consumer carbon tax. He hides behind buy Canadian slogans while signing strategic partnerships to buy communist. He builds his majority coalition of cowards—