Bill C-13

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

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.

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

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, the member knows full well, from the debates last week on the Bloc's private member's bill, that we are talking about literally hundreds and hundreds of treaties of all sorts, sizes and forms.

It is just not feasible, let alone being able to use 300-plus members of Parliament, as a way to negotiate an agreement. Traditionally, it has worked exceptionally well for Canada.

As has been pointed out, the number one export to the U.K. is in fact gold. Quebec and Ontario are the biggest benefactors, because they produce the most gold. Virtually all provinces produce gold.

Recognizing this, would the member not see that as a very strong asset for the province of Quebec and indeed all of Canada?

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Madam Speaker, I do not understand the question. I have already said that we are in favour of this trade relationship. We like doing business with the United Kingdom. It is our largest partner after the United States, even though it is very far behind and not comparable. We have a number of strong companies in the aerospace industry. It is in our best interest to do business with the U.K. We have no problem with that; the matter is settled. As I said, we will be voting in favour of the principle for that reason. We will then see whether the cons outweigh the pros, but we are in favour of the trade relationship.

Five years ago, I rose right here to speak in favour of the temporary agreement with the U.K. I have no issue with that. I cannot be any clearer. That is not a hypothetical. Now, as far as treaties are concerned, the bill has a definition for major treaties. I sit on the Standing Committee on International Trade. My colleague does not, because that would mean he would be in the House less often.

I was elected in 2019, six years ago. I am trying not to forget any of the agreements that the Standing Committee on International Trade has studied. We studied the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, the agreement with the U.K. and the agreement with Ukraine. We did a study on a hypothetical agreement with Ecuador, but that is not an agreement that we have before us. Maybe I am forgetting some, but I count three. We are nowhere near the thousands. We have studied three agreements in six years, so it is not that bad to demand a little transparency and some serious work.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, I want to come back to Bill C‑228. I would like my colleague to comment on something that is unique to Canada, which is likely one of the least democratic places when it comes to international treaties.

Quebec has set up a mechanism for examining international treaties in its National Assembly. Canada has been slow to do the same. What we are doing today is simply ratifying the agreement. As my former leader used to say, we are like voting fodder. We cannot necessarily take a position on this.

I would like to hear my colleagues' thoughts on the undemocratic nature of the Canadian system.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Madam Speaker, we live in a monarchy, so that comes with certain stipulations. I think that there is no better example of this than what happened in late 2020, when the committee had to study an agreement with the United Kingdom without having received the text of that agreement. I remember it well. We heard from witnesses, representatives from businesses, organizations and institutes, who were talking about what they recommended or did not recommend, what they would like to see more of and what they hoped to get. At one point, I raised my hand and asked them whether they had seen the agreement, because I had not. I told them that it seemed as though they were basing their comments on something they had seen, whereas I had not seen anything. They all told me that, no, they had not seen the agreement.

I think nothing illustrates the fact that we are in a Parliament with rather serious shortcomings more than when we see that we have policies but no firm law requiring a deadline, and that those policies are not being respected, as we see today with 15 days instead of 21 days. It is all well and good for the government to mention on the website that there is a treaty policy. It is all very well for the Liberals to puff out their chests and say that we have been democratic since 2008. The fact remains that we are never consulted beforehand. There is never any debate beforehand. We have also noticed that, instead of adopting agreements, we adopt bills that are only a few pages long. We cannot really change or amend anything. When we look at the history of Canada, we see that, initially, there were a few monitoring mechanisms and annual reporting obligations, but little by little they have all been abandoned over time. I think we simply have a parliamentary monarchy that is heavy on monarchy and light on parliament.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I am glad the Bloc will be supporting the legislation. That is a very strong and encouraging sign. When I was a provincial MLA, provinces often signed off on MOUs, memorandums of understand. Many of them were of an economic nature.

Would the member apply the same principles, for example, to the province of Quebec? Should Quebec not sign off on something until it is thoroughly debated and discussed inside the provincial legislature by all political entities?

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Madam Speaker, there is so much I would have liked to say about that because, for starters, there is the Gérin-Lajoie doctrine. There are procedures in place for a high level of transparency regarding Quebec's National Assembly. That said, to take things a step further, I think we need a law that provides a place at the negotiating table for Quebec and any provinces that want it, at least with respect to sectors that directly affect a given province.

There has been only one instance of such a thing occurring, and it was during the negotiations with the European Union. It was not Canada that wanted it. It was because the European Union demanded that its countries ratify the agreement one by one and wanted the provinces interested in being part of it to be part of it—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

I have to interrupt the hon. member. His time is up.

The hon. member for Mississauga East—Cooksville.

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Madam Speaker, today I rise to support this legislation, which would welcome the United Kingdom into the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, or, as we know it, the CPTPP. This debate gives us a chance to reflect on what trade really means to communities across Canada.

Today, I want to focus on my community of Mississauga, a city that I am proud to represent in this chamber and in government. It is a shining example of Canada's diversity, innovation and economic vitality.

Mississauga is home to a tremendous business community, from manufacturers and tech start-ups to food processors and service providers. Many of these businesses have built their success on serving local and regional markets, but increasingly, they are looking beyond our borders, recognizing that to be able to grow, they need to reach customers around the world.

Some businesses have already taken that leap. They are exporting goods and services across continents, tapping into new markets and growing their footprint. These success stories are so inspiring, and I have met many of these business owners. They show what is possible with the right products, the right team and the right opportunities.

However, I know there are many businesses in Mississauga that have not exported yet. They may have thought about and considered it but perhaps are hesitant. I can understand that exporting can be a very big step for a business.

I failed to mention that I will be sharing my time with the member for Cape Spear, whose comments we will welcome on this legislation.

With regard to exporting, what businesses have to think about involves the risk of exporting, uncertainty, questions about tariffs, regulations, language barriers, cultural differences, shipping logistics, payment terms and more. For small and medium-sized businesses, especially those operated primarily in local markets, the idea of exporting can feel overwhelming, but it does not have to be this way. Our government is here to help and to be in their corner.

This is where Canada's trade diversification strategy truly shines, not only through agreements like the CPTPP, but through the strong network of trade commissioners across the country and around the world who work tirelessly to support Canadian businesses. Trade commissioners are on the ground in these key markets around the world. They provide personalized advice, market intelligence and connections. They help businesses understand how to use trade agreements to their advantage, to identify potential customers and to navigate through regulatory requirements. They open doors that previously seemed shut.

For example, a manufacturing firm in Mississauga that produces packaging solutions has probably never thought about selling to Japan or Vietnam, which may need their products and services, but a trade commissioner could introduce it to these potential partners, explain how tariff reductions under the CPTPP would improve their competitiveness and assist with market-entry strategies. That personalized boots-on-the-ground support reduces risk and gives entrepreneurs the confidence they need to take the leap into exporting.

Trade agreements like the CPTPP play a vital role. By reducing or eliminating tariffs on a wide range of goods and services across the 11 countries that are part of the CPTPP, covering nearly 500 million consumers with a combined GDP of more than $13 trillion, the CPTPP creates a more level playing field for Canadian businesses and gives them more certainty. This means products manufactured in Mississauga, whether in advanced machinery, food production or software services, become more affordable and attractive to buyers in these countries. It also means Canadian companies benefit from common standards on labour, the environment and intellectual property protection, which help ensure fair competition.

Trade diversification is essential for businesses in Mississauga and across our great country of Canada. The global economy is complex; it is ever-changing. Relying too heavily on a single market can leave companies and entire communities vulnerable to shocks, which we have seen in recent times.

We have seen this during recent disruptions, whether from the COVID-19 pandemic, trade disputes or geopolitical tensions. By diversifying their markets, companies can spread the risk, tap into new demand and increase their resilience. That is why the national goal of doubling Canada's non-U.S. exports over the next decade matters so much to Mississauga and Canada. It is not just a number; it is a target that represents real opportunities for our businesses, workers and local economies. For my city and our country, it means more manufacturers exporting advanced products, more tech start-ups breaking into global markets and more service providers creating high-quality jobs that benefit families right here at home.

This is especially important for small and medium-sized businesses, which make up the backbone of Mississauga's economy. I was delighted to have the Mississauga Board of Trade appear as a witness at the trade committee here in Ottawa, and it explained how important diversification is for small and medium-sized enterprises in Mississauga. These companies often do not have the resources to absorb big shocks or to easily pivot without support. Trade agreements combined with government services can help level the playing field to ensure these businesses can fully participate and chart their paths to growth.

It is not just the exporters that benefit. The jobs created by increased exports ripple through the economy, from manufacturing floors to supply chains to marketing teams, with all of them working together. When these businesses grow, they hire more people, invest in innovation and contribute to a more vibrant local economy. This also helps with something we have been challenged with for a long time, which is our productivity. These companies become much more productive when they invest themselves in looking at new markets and staying as competitive as they possibly can be.

Mississauga's diversity is a major strength. Our city is home to people from all over the world, many with deep knowledge of languages, cultures and business practices in the countries where the CPTPP operates. This gives our businesses a unique advantage, one that can be leveraged with the right tools and supports.

I will now go to the United Kingdom. Welcoming the U.K. into the CPTPP adds an important new dimension to Canada's trade diversification strategy. The U.K. is a major economy with long-standing ties to Canada. Its accession expands the agreement's reach and opens new opportunities for Canadian businesses, including those in Mississauga.

U.K. inclusion also sends a strong message to the world that the CPTPP is a high-standard, inclusive trade pact that continues to grow. This stability and scale give exporters greater confidence and make it easier for them to engage in international markets.

Supporting this legislation means supporting businesses in Mississauga that are ready to grow, want to take the next step and need the right tools to make it happen. It means backing the government's efforts to build a trade ecosystem, agreements, services and infrastructure that help Canadian entrepreneurs reduce risk and seize these opportunities. It means investing in communities and workers by creating the conditions for sustainable economic growth.

Mississauga's story is Canada's story. It is a story of innovation, diversity, resilience and ambition. The CPTPP and U.K. accession are critical parts of that story. Let us give our businesses the tools they need to write their next chapter, from the main street to the global stage.

We have set the goal of increasing our international trade beyond the United States by over 50% over the next decade. That would be from $300 billion, where we are today with exports, to $600 billion for Canada. What does that mean? It means jobs in our communities. It means a stronger Canada, a Canada strong.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Madam Speaker, when we make trade negotiations or trade deals, it is an opportunity to actually make a deal. I am wondering what we got in return for signing on to this U.K. deal and allowing them into the CPTPP. I am thinking particularly of our beef and pork industries for cattle and hogs. Did we get any concessions? There are trade barriers there right now. Did those trade barriers get eliminated?

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will speak to this trade agreement with the U.K.'s accession into the CPTPP. We have other agreements, be it with CETA or agreements with other countries around the world. Canada is a trading nation.

Those agreements allow for open dialogue. I understand the concerns of the beef producers, but having open dialogue with the U.K. allows us to put our story forward, to make ground, to be able to open up markets.

It is very important that we continue to keep those communication channels open. By having an agreement like this, those communication channels continue to stay open so that we can continue to make our case for our great beef producers here in Canada.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, I understand what my colleague means when he talks about open dialogue to develop new markets, but the big problem is that Canada is one of the countries with the poorest democratic framework for studying this type of treaty, as our Bill C‑228 clearly demonstrates.

I have a very simple question for my colleague. Does he think it is appropriate that this legislative body is hardly consulted when trade agreements are being drafted and negotiated?

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is imperative that government, when it is doing a trade deal, reach out to a vast array of stakeholders. That is all levels of government and stakeholders in every sector. That is what has happened with the CPTPP, as well as with the accession of the U.K. into the CPTPP: reaching out to those stakeholders. That has happened. The vast majority of those stakeholders are in favour of our moving forward.

I sit on the international trade committee. It is a privilege here in this House. At that trade committee, there is an opportunity to debate, to go through the bill, to look at parts of the bill and to really dissect any issues within the bill in which we think there could be improvements.

We have a robust model here in Canada to be able to bring these trade agreements to our country and to help with our trade. We are a trading nation. While 2.5% of the world's trade is done by Canada, we make up only 0.5% of the world's population.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, if the member could reflect back on this, in the last federal election, the Prime Minister made a commitment to Canadians to look at ways in which we can expand trading opportunities that go beyond the United States. This is a good example of the commitment that the Prime Minister made to Canadians.

I am wondering if he can provide his thoughts on that.

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member is quite right. As soon as that election was over and we won it, the Prime Minister made sure to visit our greatest trading partners, one being the U.K. It is our number three trading partner.

We have increased trade with the U.K. From 2016, it has gone up almost 53%. We want to continue on that track and to continue to increase that trade. The way to do that is for our Prime Minister and our government to reach out to other like-minded countries to be able to open those doors and open trade because it is good for our—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

There is time for one last question.

The hon. member for Huron—Bruce.