International Trade Committee on May 3rd, 2007

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

Monsieur Pépin, Madam Burrows, would you comment?

[Normand Pépin]

I don't want to be repetitive, but my comment in French would be pretty much the same.

We all need information before there can be any debate. We had to carry out some fairly in-depth research in order to locate the information that was available. It is important that it be made more accessible.

This gentleman talked about the NACC's report being available on the Web. Even though I agree with him, the fact is it was made available on February 23, even though the meeting had been announced one week prior to that in a government press release. Furthermore, there was no question of government members meeting with the NACC, according to what was stated in the press release. So, all of that has to be raised.

Furthermore, there is not only the matter of the in-depth negotiations that are underway, but also of the working groups. There are nine dealing with security and ten dealing with prosperity. Exactly what are they discussing? We have to know that before engaging in a broader debate. I believe that this question absolutely must be put to the House of Commons. That's the only option.

[Nancy Burrows]

Professor Hart stated that there is some confusion between the two types of consultations. Personally, I do not believe that we are confusing them. The government tells us not to be concerned, that these are just minor technical consultations, and so on. But we want the politicians to engage in debate in the House of Commons about the reasons for moving ahead with this and whether or not we should move ahead, well before there are any more technical discussions about how to go about it.

The process is completely reversed. Our suggestion is to stop the process and begin all over again, by asking the real questions in the House of Commons, for example, rather than in the Chamber of Commerce.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Julian, your time is up.

We will now go to the next round of questioning. Monsieur Cardin.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Chairman, considering that we have already had two complete rounds of questioning, perhaps we should take this opportunity to deal with the Bloc Québécois motion which is already on the agenda. We would have, at the most, some 12 minutes to dispose of it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

You want to deal with that today then? What I'll do is dismiss the witnesses, we'll suspend for two minutes and go in camera, and then carry on.

Thank you all very much for coming today. It was another very informative meeting.

A point of order, Mr. Cannan.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Why are we going in camera?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Cannan, we've always gone in camera to deal with committee business. It's routine. We've always done it. It's the normal procedure of the committee, but the committee could make a decision on that, certainly.

First I'll give you a chance to bring it up. Mr. Cannan, if you want to bring it up right now, before we go in camera--

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

I would move that we don't go in camera.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Cannan has moved that we don't move the meeting to an in camera meeting. Is there any discussion on that?

Mr. Julian.

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

This is going to surprise Mr. Cannan, but I second his motion. This is a public meeting, this is a public motion, and it should be discussed in public.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Any other discussion on the motion?

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

So we won't go in camera. We will carry on the business in public.

I will suspend for one minute, so the witnesses can clear. Then we'll come back and deal with the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We will reconvene the meeting now.

I want to remind all members that we are going to end the meeting on time.

Monsieur Cardin, if you would like to read your motion and comment on it, we'll carry on from there.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Chairman, everything was done according to the rules. You received this notice of motion within the 48-hour timeframe. If you want me to re-read it, I can do that, given that there have been discussions in the context of the SPP with respect to water, as well as statements made by members of the Conservative Party to the effect that there would be total protection—something which I do not believe to be true. The motion reads as follows:

Whereas Canada's water resources must be protected; Whereas NAFTA covers all services and all goods, except those that are expressly excluded, and water is not included; Whereas this situation, of federal responsibility, puts the provincial laws prohibiting bulk water exports at risk; Whereas a simple agreement by exchange of letters among the governments of Canada, the United States and Mexico, stating that water is not covered under NAFTA, must be respected by international tribunals as if it were an integral part of NAFTA; It is moved that: Pursuant to section 108(2) of the Standing Orders, the Standing Committee recommends that the government quickly begin talks with its American and Mexican counterparts to exclude water from the goods governed under NAFTA, and that adoption of this motion be reported to the House at the earliest possible opportunity.

I just want to point out that the French version should read “Conformément à l'article 108(2) du Règlement de la Chambre des communes, [...]”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you very much, Monsieur Cardin.

Are there any comments you'd like to make on your motion?

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

No, Mr. Chairman. I think it speaks for itself. We can dispose of it quickly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Is there any discussion?

Mr. Julian is next and then Mr. Cannan.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Bloc Québécois has tabled an excellent motion. I intend to support Mr. Cardin's motion. However, I would like to move a friendly amendment, with a view to clarifying a couple of points. I hope it will be well received. I will provide the Clerk with a copy when I'm finished.

First, in the third paragraph, I propose deleting the words “of federal responsibility”.

Therefore, the paragraph would read as follows: “Whereas this situation puts the provincial and federal laws regarding water protection, including the prohibition of bulk water exports, at risk;”

In the fourth paragraph, I propose the addition of the word “par” to the third line of the French version, following the words “l'ALÉNA devrait être respecté”.

In the final paragraph, I propose the addition of the words “of the House of Commons” following the words “Pursuant to section 108(2) of the Standing Orders”.

Finally, the fourth line of the final paragraph should read as follows: “in order to exclude water from NAFTA”.

Those are the clarifications I would like to suggest. I will provide a copy to the Clerk.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We will have the clerk read the motion with the amendments. There are a lot of amendments there. Then we'll have a discussion on the amendments.

I think it's going to be very difficult for members to understand what's happened here if we don't lay it all out.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Normand Radford]

So, the motion would read as follows:

Whereas Canada's water resources must be protected; Whereas NAFTA covers all services and all goods, except those that are expressly excluded, and water is not excluded; Whereas this situation puts the provincial and federal laws…

This is where the changes are.

… concerning the protection of water, including the prohibition of bulk water exports, at risk; Whereas a simple agreement by exchange of letters among the governments of Canada, United States and Mexico, stating that water is not covered under NAFTA, must be respected by international tribunals as if it were an integral part of NAFTA; It is moved that: Pursuant to section 108(2) of the Standing Orders, the Standing Committee on International Trade recommend that the government quickly begin talks with its Mexican and American counterparts to exclude water from the goods governed by NAFTA, and that adoption of this motion and the preamble be reported to the House at the earliest possible opportunity.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Have all members heard the amendments that have been proposed?

Monsieur Cardin is next, and then we'll go to Mr. Cannan.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I can only agree with the suggested changes. So, we can move on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We'll go to discussion on the amendment.

Go ahead, Mr. Cannan, and then Mr. Lemieux.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

I just want to clarify that you're removing the words “federal responsibility” from the equation. It will just say, “whereas the situation puts the provincial laws”.