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, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I am rising on a point of order in regard to parliamentary language. I do not think that associating the word “coward” with the Prime Minister is appropriate.

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

I agree. It does cause disruption.

I would like the hon. member to please withdraw the comment.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will withdraw that and try to think of another word. He builds his majority coalition, which is too afraid to face its constituents.

I withdrew.

There is an alternative approach. Instead of selling cynical policies, we can provide hope. I encourage Canadians to watch the Conservative leader's recent speech in London. They will see a politician who is not afraid to defend his beliefs in free trade and free markets, a leader who reaches for optimism, not cynicism, a leader who will give it to us straight.

The Prime Minister said he would explore the variable geometry of our alliances. We saw how he tried to square that one in Iran. He then tried to triangulate with the anti-American elements in caucus. All that Canadians saw was him going around in circles. The Prime Minister would rather twist himself into a pretzel than give a straight answer. With each flip and each flop, he strains his credibility, not just with Canadians but with foreign leaders, allies and enemies alike.

As he departs on his 27th foreign trip, he leaves behind a worsening economy and a deteriorating balance sheet. Meanwhile, the economic carnage adds up. Tens of thousands of public servants are laid off so he can give billions in corporate welfare to Brookfield. Lumber and steel mills continue to shutter. Our auto industry is out of gas. In a few weeks, he will hike taxes on carbon and alcohol. Our economy is shrinking while he is off to secure his next meaningless strategic partnership. His failure to secure a deal for our cattle producers is a warning that every Canadian should heed. His time is running out. With every backroom deal he makes and with every Italian holiday he takes, Canadians are watching him. A day will come when his polling numbers start to falter and Canadians will ask, where is the beef?

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

Madam Speaker, there were many fundamental flaws, I would suggest, in the member opposite's speech. She seems to take great exception to the fact that we have a Prime Minister who understands the economy and the benefits of trade and building relationships beyond the Canada-U.S.A. border. Understanding that has led to literally billions of dollars of investment coming into Canada.

We have also seen export opportunities created and enhanced, meaning jobs and a stronger Canadian economy. That is the reality. Whether Conservative members want to acknowledge that reality or not, quite frankly, from my perspective, does not really matter, because Canadians understand it and see the benefits of having a proactive prime minister who is going out and bringing jobs in.

Can the member provide her thoughts on whether or not her leader's travels are something she supports?

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to hear the question, although I am very disappointed in the member across the way, and he knows why. However, he can make it up to me by taking me to lunch at Odi's Kingburger in Renfrew, where we do not have to ask, “Where's the beef?”, like we do in Bill C-13.

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

Madam Speaker, in a previous question, I mentioned to my Liberal colleague that when it comes time for Canada to sign international trade agreements, there is a serious democratic deficit because Parliament does not really have a say in the matter, unlike the United States, for example, and other industrialized countries.

Does my colleague not think that there should be a comprehensive review of how this government and this Parliament conclude international treaties?

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON]

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague's sentiment. I do not think the Liberal government can do that. We will have to wait until we have a strong majority Conservative government to get that done.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora—Kiiwetinoong, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to make a comment for the hon. member, and I am sure she will agree with me. Based on a lot of the comments we have been hearing from Liberal members during the debate today, they keep imploring Canadians to trust the Prime Minister because of his résumé. I would like to look at the facts.

The facts are that the Prime Minister promised a free trade deal with the United States by last year, but it has not happened. I know forestry workers are among the many across the country who are facing the devastating results of that. The Prime Minister also promised that we would have the strongest economy in the G7 and we now have the only economy that is shrinking in the G7. There is certainly a difference in the rhetoric coming from the Liberal government and the reality that Canadians are facing.

I hear that in my riding, and I am wondering whether the member has any comments on it.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON]

Madam Speaker, we definitely do see that. Canadians will see and feel that when each household's tax bill rises by $6,000 just to cover the $60-billion Alto mess that is on the way.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora—Kiiwetinoong, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member's response on that important conversation. With all the challenges we have, whether it is on trade or the economy, we can see continually that the Liberal members and the Liberal government are saying one thing and we are not really seeing any action as a result of it.

The Prime Minister has been in office now for a year but continues to say that he is new on the job. Canadians are noticing, and at some point we are going to need to see some results from the government.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON]

Madam Speaker, getting back to trade agreements, one of the trade agreements that we are looking at now is with the trans-Pacific one, but what concerns Canadians is the strategic partnership with China and allowing Chinese-owned companies to export 49,000 electric vehicles to start. There is a reason Canadians, and especially government workers, are concerned about TikTok. A Chinese-owned electric vehicle has far more security concerns than even TikTok. The Liberals should wake up. Does the Prime Minister not have his security clearance so he can get the NSA advisories?

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC]

Madam Speaker, I want to build on my colleague's excellent speech. The Prime Minister has spent a great deal of time travelling abroad, signing memorandums of understanding and participating in high-profile international events. While international engagement certainly plays an important role in advancing Canada's interests, it cannot come at the expense of the pressing priorities we face here at home. Canadians are looking for leadership that is grounded, focused, and attentive to the challenges facing families, workers and entrepreneurs across this country, but right now they are not seeing it.

Our trade agenda is only as strong as our domestic economy. The reality is simple: No agreement abroad will fix Canada's outdated tax system. No foreign handshake or high-level summit will modernize our regulatory structures. None of these trips will improve the service delivery of our public institutions, increase the personnel of our military or update our privacy and intellectual property laws to reflect a rapidly changing global environment. These are the tasks that require committed national leadership, leadership that begins here, not on the international conference circuit.

On October 22, 2025, the Prime Minister announced in Ottawa an ambitious goal: to double Canada's non-U.S. exports over the next decade. Conservatives take that objective seriously. We worked constructively with the government and granted the Liberals unprecedented authorities under Bill C-5, the One Canadian Economy Act, to empower the government to pursue those ambitions. We believe that if the government were prepared to act boldly, we could collectively position Canada for long-term economic strength, but a year has passed, and the patience of Canadian entrepreneurs is wearing thin.

Consider the economic picture before us. Over the last decade under the Liberals, approximately $500 billion in foreign capital has left Canada. This is not an abstract figure. It represents lost opportunity, lost productivity and lost confidence in Canada's economic direction. Investment that could have helped build industries, create jobs and support innovation has instead gone elsewhere, to countries like Ireland, where the Prime Minister has citizenship. Ireland has robust foreign direct investment through a modern taxation system.

At the same time, according to the Business Development Bank of Canada, Canada today has 100,000 fewer entrepreneurs than we did 10 years ago, even though our population has grown by 10 million. This is a staggering shift. It means fewer new businesses, fewer new ideas and fewer pathways for economic growth. For a country built on ambition, creativity and enterprise, this decline should ring alarm bells for every policy-maker in Ottawa, but is not being talked about.

Canada's economic challenges will not be solved through symbolism abroad or even by Bill C-13, but through practical action here at home. Therefore, if the Prime Minister is truly committed to strengthening Canada's economy, here is what I believe he must do right now.

First, we need to reform Canada's tax system. We need a system that rewards effort, investment and innovation rather than penalizes them. Entrepreneurs must see Canada as a place where risk-taking is supported and where success is not met with punitive tax burdens. That means revisiting profit-sharing models, capital gains rules and the taxation environment for start-ups so talented Canadians can build their ideas into thriving enterprises that scale up in Canada.

Second, the Prime Minister should work with the Conservatives to repeal anti-energy laws that have contributed to pushing investment out of this country. He knows these policies are not working. They have created uncertainty, discouraged development and weakened one of Canada's greatest competitive advantages. It is time to scrap them, not go over them and leave them in place, in order to reverse the capital outflow we are seeing. Yesterday I was pleased to support a private member's bill from the member for Calgary Signal Hill to do exactly that by removing the moratorium on oil tankers in British Columbia.

Third, we must move away from the government's habit of picking economic winners and losers. The Minister of Finance's experiment with large production subsidies for automakers has not delivered the results Canadians expected. We were promised a thriving auto industry less than two years ago in the House. This example should stand for all Canadians that big subsidies to big corporations do not result in better jobs for Canadian workers and families.

Fourth, we need to reform service delivery within the public service. The public service has grown exponentially, but we are not seeing the necessary results. We have to do that work.

Fifth, the government must outline and commit to essential infrastructure upgrades. The ports in British Columbia are wonderful. We love them. However, they are not performing at their capacity. We lack the strategic infrastructure investments across Canada to move people and goods in a way that is commensurate with a G7 economy. We have to grow up and get that work done.

The sixth thing is very important. The Prime Minister should dedicate as much time to engaging with first nations leaders here at home as he does with world leaders abroad. Why do I say that? The Supreme Court of Canada has made many rulings in the last number of years outlining the rights and titles of first nations. For economic reconciliation at large to take place, we have to look at new models of engaging with our first nations.

I believe in a Canada where first nations people on reserve are all millionaires, have more economic potential and economic drive than the average Canadian and are pushing new projects in rural Canada that are lifting up Canada's economy and contributing to our GDP in ways we never thought imaginable. The Prime Minister has a social license to do that right now, but he prefers to go on international trips than to engage with Canadians here at home.

On that point, seventh is that in B.C. we are facing some real and significant challenges on private property and fee simple land. B.C. is the gateway to doubling our exports abroad. If the Prime Minister does not take seriously the concerns of everyday British Columbians on ensuring that fee simple land and private property are essential to Canada's economy, people will continue to move their money outside British Columbia. We will not see the strategic mineral reserves developed nor exports grow; we will see the opposite. He has to be on top of this file. We cannot live in a society where private property is not protected, but this is the number one issue coming up in B.C. right now.

Finally, we must improve Canada's intellectual property laws and privacy laws. We are outdated, not modern, and it is hurting our entrepreneurs. We have to do better. The Minister of Industry needs to bring forward the requisite legislation to improve things like open banking, to ensure that children are protected on the Internet, and to ensure that we are giving our tech companies the biggest bang for their buck if they decide to stay in Canada.

Despite the challenges we face, Canada's potential is extraordinary. We are blessed with abundant resources like no other nation on earth is, but we are squandering a critical period in time when we could be doing so much more. By refocusing on the fundamentals, prioritizing economic growth at home and making the structural reforms to our economy that we can do only in the chamber, we can restore some confidence in Canada's economy, bring 100,000 entrepreneurs back into Canadian society and reverse the outflow of foreign direct investment. None of these trade deals will matter if we do not get our economic house in order.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec Centre, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to hear that the member points to the fact that we need to double our exports to non-U.S. destinations in the next few years. He also knows that Canada has what the world needs in that context.

I am surprised, however, to hear his leader say that the PM needs to stay at home; that if he were the PM, he would stay at home; that we should not travel to meet global and business leaders who will be investing billions of dollars into our economy and building a stronger Canada for all workers; and that we should not engage and meet people where they are in the world.

Does the member agree with that point of view of his leader?

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC]

Madam Speaker, the member for Québec Centre's question was a great one. In fact, I think he is a great member of Parliament. I wish he were still in cabinet, because I believe he could make some real reforms for the public service that are not taking place under the Treasury Board Secretariat right now.

I will address the member's point. What I was outlining in my speech is that we are not focusing on the economic fundamentals here in Canada. We can sign whatever MOU or strategic partnership we want, but if we do not reform our taxation system and if we do not get our rules on energy development modernized, all that work abroad means nothing. If we do not have our economic house in order, we are failing as a nation. That is why I am encouraging the Prime Minister today to stay at home and to work on the economic fundamentals. He should not try to be a puppeteer but should roll up his sleeves and operationalize everything Canadians want right now.

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

Madam Speaker, this is an interesting debate today. We are talking about international trade treaties.

There is one treaty that has already been ratified by most of the officials on both sides, the one with Taiwan. About six weeks ago, we heard the Taiwanese ambassador wonder why the Prime Minister has chosen not to sign this agreement, which has had the green light since last April. In Davos, the Prime Minister said that we need to forge alliances with stable and reliable allies, and I think that Taiwan is such an ally.

Could my colleague tell me what the Prime Minister is thinking by not signing this agreement, when all that is missing is his signature?