International Trade Committee on Aug. 21st, 2006

[David Milton]

It will cause further destabilization.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Monsieur Chevrette.

[Guy Chevrette]

I would just like to address some of those questions, including the one raised by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade and Mr. Julian.

I know the kind of thing you have to do, because I went through this in a previous life. But whatever you do as parliamentarians, I would ask that you not forget the industry, regardless of your individual political positions. The industry I represent needs a shot in the arm. That is no secret. I beg you to give us that shot in the arm. Use whatever means you prefer, but do what you have to do to make it happen, setting aside calculated political moves. I am begging you, as parliamentarians, on behalf of the Quebec industry which is in very dire straits, to take the needed steps to help it stay alive.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Brodrick.

[John Brodrick]

If you don't mind, I'd like to answer a previous question.

You mentioned that it was small American business. Out of that $500 million, a half billion dollars, International Paper stands to receive $150 million. I also have here Plum Creek, also a member of the coalition. It is the largest and most geographically diverse private landowner in the nation, with more than eight million acres of timberland. I wish I were that small.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Julian, you have 15 seconds, if you would like to ask a very short question. Or shall we move on?

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

No, I always take my 15 seconds.

Mr. Chevrette, you talked about four amendments. In fact, in three of the areas, there was no amendment or change made. The only change that was made involved the termination clause, which went from 23 months to 18 months, and a standstill provision that is slightly longer.

Is the industry disappointed to see that these demands, which were really quite reasonable, were ignored or at least not supported by the government?

[Guy Chevrette]

As I said a little earlier, 6 plus 18 equals 24, just as 23 plus 1 equals 24. According to our analysis, it is better to have a six-month than a one-month timeframe, because it allows us to do certain things. We can organize public challenges. We can conduct ad campaigns to protest against the termination of the agreement. We can organize demonstrations at the international level, but at the same time, we, too, may want to terminate this agreement. In fact, I was unaware of the fact that British Columbia had asked to reduce it to 24 months. We only found that out later, when we were told on July 1 that the period had been cut back to 23 months. We were very disappointed because, in our opinion, seven years of peace was fantastic. The fact is that people are fed up with having to pay. Our small council spends $5 million a year on legal fees, and that doesn't include what every individual company pays for this infamous treaty. We're talking about $10 to $15 million for Quebec alone. In the case of British Columbia, it surely amounts to $25 or $30 million. And there is also Alberta and Ontario. It has become prohibitively expensive to carry on supposedly much more orderly trade at the international level. It's completely ridiculous, if you ask me, and that's why any course of action that involves negotiation is preferable to legal disputes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Chevrette, and all of you, gentlemen. I appreciate your coming today, again.

We have one more meeting. I would ask the witnesses, if possible, to be at the table in a couple of minutes. Thank you again.

This meeting is adjourned.