Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to participate in this debate on the one Canadian economy act.
We are here with this bill on these timelines because the government was given a mandate to unite, protect and build Canada. I do not think we expected to be in this place with this bill, but necessity is the mother of invention, and this crisis has created an opportunity for us to find and build the new solidarity we need to build Canada in the coming years. We did not expect to be in this place with this bill because, for centuries, generations of Canadians, immigrants to and from Canada, generations of Canadian leaders, had managed to balance our north-south relationship with the United States and the east-west relationship within Canada. The complex set of relationships between different indigenous peoples on this continent and between indigenous peoples and settlers continues to define both sets of relationships, but both of these east-west and north-south ties were fundamental to the growth of Canada.
The east-west relationship is the one that we generally learned in history class and that we continue to live and work on in the House. On this side of the House, with members from every province and two of three territories, it is one we take incredibly seriously. We know how that east-west relationship evolved. It was with the expansion of the country, first west and then north and then back east. There was the building of infrastructure, including railways, highways, waterways, and energy and electricity connections. There were the debates that arose from our different regional perspectives on those projects, including the building of businesses and family ties, as well as the many constitutional battles that brought some of us here, or scarred us, which were often focused on Quebec or the rest of Canada's relationship with it, but it is one on which we have all engaged. There are, again, the injustices that have been or are being done with respect to indigenous peoples, and they are part of the east-west relationship that we continue to live.
To build Canada from east to west took imagination, commitment and conviction, and this new government, this 45th Parliament, along with our constituents, are all beneficiaries of that hard work to build the country from east to west. The north-south ties are not always the daily concern of the House or of Canadian leaders, but it is a set of ties that so many of us live with every day, and we cannot understand the monumental east-west shifts without having the context of our north-south relationship, because the north-south ties predate the creation of the Dominion of Canada, too. There is the war of independence and the arrival of the United Empire Loyalists, the War of 1812, the threat of the Fenian raids and the American Civil War.
We have had to manage the north-south relationship since July 1, 1867, and occasionally we have taken great strides, whether it was with the Auto Pact, the acid rain treaty, the free trade agreements or our participation in the Afghanistan mission. While our predecessors in these seats debated these issues, Canadians continued to build north-south ties, including businesses, conferences, holidays, research partnerships, shopping and, most importantly, the family ties in immigration that define our two nations. These are among the Maritimes, Quebec and New England, the Canadian prairie provinces, and the U.S. Midwest and west. They are among Niagara and Buffalo, Windsor and Detroit, Waterloo and Silicon Valley, Tsawwassen, B.C. and Point Roberts, as well as Washington, and the Mohawk nation of Akwesasne. These are all north-south connections that define the Canadian-U.S. relationship.
The north-south relationship was captured so well by President John F. Kennedy in his address to this chamber 64 years ago when he said, and I think some of us have heard these words before, “Geography has made us neighbours. History has made us friends. Economics has made us partners. And necessity has made us allies.” Whenever we had a difficulty with the north-south relationship, we could generally make progress on it, not necessarily solving it, but continuing to work on it. All the time the north-south relationship developed, our economy, along with our web of connections, which each of us and our constituents had with our neighbours to the south, also grew.
From time to time, we would hear from people in Canada that not all was well with the north-south relationship for Canadian artists and creators, our softwood lumber industry, refugees and Canadian innovators. However, again, generally, this country has succeeded. Indeed, this country exists and has survived because we were able to manage both our east-west relationships and our north-south relationships and not let one be destroyed by the other. For decades and centuries, we have been able to keep these two sets of relationships balanced. As long as those basic collective benefits of the north-south relationship of economic and security were there, we had the luxury of focusing our conflict on the east-west relationship here, but that has changed, and now we have to change.
President Kennedy's description of our north-south relationship no longer holds, at least not all of it, anyway. Geography continues to make us neighbours, now both physically and digitally. History continues to make us friends, even if some of those individual friendships or family connections have been tested, but the new U.S. administration is breaking our economic partnership vocally and explicitly. It is threatening our sovereignty vocally and explicitly.
This means that we need to find new allies. We have a necessity to find new allies. Our government is doing this every day, and we are showing leadership on this through our G7 presidency, but we need to find and build new allies, new economies and new ties in the place we should have been looking to all along, which is at home. No matter how strong the family relationships are across the border, no matter how close the border is or how closely tied our economies continue to be, we have to look east-west for our economy, our security and our sovereignty.
That means the one Canadian economy act. As the House knows, the one Canadian economy act is in two sections. There are two new proposed pieces of legislation: the free trade and labour mobility in Canada act and the building Canada act.
The free trade and labour mobility in Canada act would build those east-west ties that we all neglected, and here are some examples: a farmer in Saskatchewan grows organic produce and wants to sell it in Alberta, but the certification rules just do not line up; a certified welder in Nova Scotia is offered a short-term job in a federally regulated project in Newfoundland and Labrador, but they have to reapply for recognition; or a tech firm in Ontario builds an energy-efficient appliance that meets the highest standards, but when they market it in B.C., they are told to go through another process.
The building Canada act is a strong bill, improved by the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, with an engaged Parliament, which we are engaging with today, with protections both in the bill and in the Constitution, to make sure we do nation building more quickly and do it right, in the way the Minister of Indigenous Services said so well in the House earlier today. However, as much as the individual provisions of the bill are important, it is the imagination and the possibility that it has already unleashed that I am looking forward to.
Provincial premiers are working together and working with us to propose new projects to build. Business and labour leaders are standing up and standing together to build. They include leaders such as Finn Johnson of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters, who said, “These nation-building projects are going to be essential to Canada's growth in the short and long-term—and UBC members will be there to build them”. There are also leaders such as Goldy Hyder of the Business Council of Canada, who said that Bill C-5 can enable us to leap out of the starting block allowing Canada to finish first in the global race for trade. There is also the Hon. Lisa Raitt, who used to sit in the chamber with us, from Coalition for a Better Future. She said that she believes Bill C-5 can play a role in strengthening Canada's long-term economic foundations. These are some of the leaders who are inspired by what the bill proposes and the mandate that we had in this election to be bold and ambitious and build the Canadian economy.
Canadians at large, including Canadians in my riding, are taking the broader perspective. They know how important the north-south relationship is, and they continue to guard and cherish those relationships and friendships, as well as the business ties and academic ties, but they know that what we took for granted in that relationship is at risk. They know that John F. Kennedy's formulation of the allyship, and the economic and security benefits we have from that relationship, are at risk. They are pleading with us to pass the bill to get going on these major nation-building projects from coast to coast, and for their elected leaders, business leaders and union leaders to put capital and their shoulders into this work. I commend the bill to the House.
