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.

The House proceeded to the consideration of 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, as reported (with amendment) from the committee.

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

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

There being no motions at report stage, the House will now proceed, without debate, to the putting of the question on the motion to concur in the bill at report stage.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Minister of International Trade]

moved that the bill, as amended, be concurred in.

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

If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I ask that it be carried on division.

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

Is that agreed?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

(Motion agreed to)

The House resumed consideration of 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, as reported (with amendment) from the committee.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the U.K. is Canada's third-largest trading partner and ally, and with this new relationship, I can see the opportunity for increased trade. However, there have been missed opportunities, and not only with pork and beef.

Like many members of the House, I have met with representatives of 127,000 British state pensioners living in Canada, who have raised the issue of their pensions with me. Those state pensions are equivalent to our Canada pension plan. They and their employers made payments for years before retirement. However, unlike the CPP, their pensions are frozen at the rate they were at when first received and do not increase with inflation. This has been British policy for decades. That does not seem fair to me, because British pensioners are fully indexed in other countries, including the United States.

The Government of Canada has made multiple representations to the U.K. government over the years with the aim of negotiating a social security agreement to end this discriminatory policy, but there has apparently been no willingness on the part of Britain to have such an agreement. The CPTPP was a perfect opportunity to revisit the issue. After all, the British policy comes with a cost to Canadian taxpayers. It has been estimated that this policy costs Canada about $470 million annually.

Canada's social security pensions are indexed, increasing the purchasing power of our citizens wherever they choose to live in retirement and ensuring they have sufficient funds to live. In failing to provide reciprocity, the British government is relying on Canada to provide for its citizens if they should find themselves in need. The Liberals missed the opportunity to address this issue when they negotiated the Canada-U.K. Trade Continuity Agreement. They missed it again when it was not included as a part of the U.K.'s accession to the CPTPP.

The U.K. is Canada's third-largest single-country trading partner for goods: $39.4 billion in 2024. It is also the third-largest single-country trading partner when it comes to services: $21.6 billion in 2024. In the last decade, bilateral trade in goods and services has increased by 52.9%. Working to increase trade with someone we already have a strong relationship with would seem to be a good thing. The U.K. is also Canada's second-largest investment partner. Inbound direct investment to Canada totalled $97 billion in 2024. We want to see that number increase.

Bill C-13, if passed, provides immediate duty-free, quota-free, unlimited access to sweet corn. There is no volume limit, as there was under the previous agreement. It provides more liberal rules of origin for Canadian agriculture export interests, including meat, processed foods, sugar-containing products and pet food. It will provide enhanced protections for investors and their investments in the U.K., with greater predictability and transparency.

Canadian investors will also have access to arbitration for resolving disputes related to U.K. measures that breach CPTPP investment provisions. These are positive outcomes. As well, there will be guaranteed access to U.K. procurement opportunities at all levels of government, including regional and local contracting authorities, as well as guaranteed access to U.K. procurement opportunities undertaken by bodies governed by public law, including schools, universities and colleges, national museums and galleries, and national park authorities. This is good news for Canadian business.

Yes, the government failed to address some of the issues that should have been a priority when it was negotiating this agreement. Our beef and pork industry will still have complaints about the inequity of treatment compared with how U.K. producers are treated in Canada, and those U.K. pensioners living here will continue to be treated as a second-class citizens, unfairly, by their government because Canada's Liberal government did not do the right thing and stand up for fair treatment. I am sad that our government did not take a more principled stand.

However, I think we can all agree that Canada needs more trade and more diversified trade. We have seen the results when we put too many eggs in one basket. Could this bill have been better? I think that is true of any trade agreement. Sometimes compromises are made to allow an agreement to move forward. That may be the situation we find ourselves in here.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook—Brant North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Edmonton Manning for his excellent remarks, which started before question period, and for raising the issue about the British pensioners and his knowledge on that. It was surprising to hear that is a $470-million cost to Canada.

Why does the hon. member believe that the government was unsuccessful in so many missed opportunities to remedy that issue? Is it lack of will or laziness? What is the reason?

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there is a saying that, in life, that we do not get what we deserve; we get what we negotiate.

I believe that the government has failed to negotiate well to finally resolve this issue, which costs the Canadian economy close to $500 million a year and made it unfair for some of the pensioners. They deserve to get a fair shot out of their investment for life, especially as seniors.

Negotiations could and should have been done better. This is an opportunity we have missed for the second time, and the government could have done a better job.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to go back to a question I asked of the previous member.

Talking about the United States, a member of the Conservative Party, the MP for Bowmanville—Oshawa North, went down to the United States. He met with the President and the vice-president, came back and gave a report saying, in essence, that we should not have a hissy fit against the Americans. Following that visit, the leader of the Conservative Party will be going too. I am not sure when or if he will be meeting with the President and the vice-president.

Does the member believe that he will come back with a report that he can share with Canadians at some point?

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if the government does its job, no one has to do anything, but the government is not doing its job. The hon. member knows that.

The Liberals have failed to come back to Canada and deliver on their promises. It has been one deadline after the other, and we still have not seen a result. If the government is suggesting that people should sit around, do nothing and not stand for Canada, then that is the member's problem. It is not our problem. I believe that we should never politicize this issue.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Edmonton Manning for raising the issue I have also been working on for years on behalf of British pensioners within Saanich—Gulf Islands.

There have been many years and many missed opportunities to try to negotiate with the British government on how it indexes the pension for Canadian expats. It does not make sense, and as the member rightly pointed out, it is a cost to the Canadian economy. It is also a needless worry to wonderful people. I am sure that each member in their own riding has had people come see them about this unfairness.

I carried with me a stack of petitions to try to hand directly to Boris Johnson when I went to a COP in Glasgow, and I had the help of my hon. colleague. I will not say his riding name because it will take too long, but we tried really hard to hand it directly to the Prime Minister of the U.K. so we could say that this is so unfair.

What do we do now? This agreement is in front of us. What can we all do collectively to push the government to get a proper deal with the U.K. government to defend our pensioners?

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. leader of the Green Party and I were together for many occasions when we met with those pensioners, trying to, first of all, listen to them and understand the issue—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I have to interrupt the member. There is an incredible amount of noise coming from courtyard, and there are people outside of the chamber interfering with the work of the chamber. Right now, I cannot even hear the member for Edmonton Manning.

I will let the member for Edmonton Manning restart from the point where he was to continue his reply.