Thank you, Mr. Chair.
In the report prepared for us by the Library of Parliament, one element is clear, and jumps off the page. We worry for several reasons. Several reasons because we have proof that we cannot be absolutely sure that water cannot become a commercial product, and therefore come under NAFTA.
When we say that water is excluded from this agreement, we are talking about water in its natural state. But water in its natural state is moving water, water we find in our water sources. That is clear. But when it is no longer there, it is no longer water in its natural state. So all the possibilities of forced export now arise. In the last line of the report's conclusion, we read:
The debate concerning bulk water removals, water exports and the NAFTA continues. Neither the public nor a number of credible organizations are certain that water will not end up as a commodity that can be traded, and that, as a result, will come under the NAFTA.
If government members are so sure that no problem exists, why not then ask for water to be formally excluded from NAFTA?
You will also see that this is spelled out in the motion. The recommendation to the government is to:
[...] begin talks with its American and Mexican counterparts to exclude water from the scope of NAFTA [...]
The text specifies “water”and not “water in its natural state” because that makes all the difference. We cannot allow ourselves to be one day forced to export water. Water is more than a natural resource, it is an essential resource. One day, perhaps it will provide us with the opportunity to save lives, but without being forced to export it in any shape or form. Of course, we cannot export water in its natural state. But once it has left the watershed, it becomes an exportable commodity.
Regarding boundary waters, I agree that is different, but only boundary waters. The water my motion refers to is all the water in our territory, not just boundary waters. Boundary waters are one thing, all the water in Canada and Quebec is another thing.
I would like to reply to Mr. Cannan. At the moment, it is Canada that participates in NAFTA discussions. But when we have a sovereign Quebec, we will protect our resources ourselves. Meanwhile, I feel that it is wise to protect them in the interests of the entire population of Canada.
Mr. Chair, let us now proceed to vote on the motion. Thank you.