International Trade Committee on April 13th, 2010

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

We were interested—

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Yes, we don't want to take up too much of Mr. Brison's time with the question.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Chair, I think all members are preoccupied and interested in long-term development of Haiti. This is an issue that has absolutely galvanized Canadians to make a difference in this part of the world, and I would be shocked if the honourable member or if you, Mr. Chair, were to preclude this committee from asking a legitimate question on Haiti and hearing the very legitimate and informed views of our guests here today.

[Gerald Keddy, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS]

With respect—

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Mr. Keddy, it's fine, we don't need to--

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Chair, this is not a partisan question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

You're burning your clock here, Mr. Brison. Prepare to be shocked.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

We're wasting more time discussing the legitimacy of a legitimate question, frankly—

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Well, it's not a legitimate question in the context of this meeting. If you want to talk about any other matter, put it on the agenda. Today we're getting a briefing on Jordan. If you want to ask questions about Jordan, they are perfectly within order.

But, Scott, you know the rules.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

But on this issue?

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

If you want to burn your clock, go ahead. I'll give you three minutes if you want to ask something about Jordan; otherwise, we'll move on.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Well, I'd like to go back, if we want to have this kind of discussion on why FIPA wasn't part of this, because I think you're denying the opportunity for my Bloc and NDP colleagues to ask the kinds of questions they typically ask on this.

Why in this case was FIPA not brought to Parliament? It is a trade agreement.

[Don Stephenson]

As I understand it, the treaty was tabled for the required 21 days in the House, but since it didn't require legislation to be implemented, no legislation was put before the House.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Typically FIPA agreements are often part of trade agreements that are tabled in the House. That has been the case in the past.

[Don Stephenson]

Certainly in some FTAs there is a chapter on investment, rather than a separate agreement--

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

That is what I find curious. Why, in this case, was the FIPA agreement not part of the enabling legislation and brought to the House for full and thorough debate? I find this inconsistent with the government's commitment to bring FTAs to the House. An investment agreement is as material as the trade of goods and services; the investment part of it is just as material, and I find it curious that it was not made part of the enabling legislation.

[Don Stephenson]

It may be that the two negotiations were initiated at different times. As I said, we often negotiate FIPAs separately from FTAs, so perhaps it's in the history of the negotiation that you may have your answer. I'd have to provide you with further information.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

What has been identified to you as human rights issues in Jordan? What are the principal issues that the government has identified as areas of concern? I agree with you that within the region Jordan has demonstrated more progressiveness than some countries, but there are lingering concerns, women's rights being one of them. What do you see as the most important concerns to be addressed in terms of ongoing human rights issues and the monitoring of them?

[Don Stephenson]

I'll let the expert answer.

[Thomas Marr, Acting Director General, Middle East and Maghreb, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade]

Thank you very much.

The point we can start with is that Jordan, considering its traditions and its location, has done quite well in a relative sense with respect to human rights. We do hear about honour killings, and they have continued in Jordan. The record will show that in 2009 the government set up a special criminal tribunal to end what might have been a sense of impunity with respect to honour killings that occur when the family takes a decision to kill a wife or a daughter. This tribunal has shown some success. Their first case was decided in October 2009. The perpetrator got 15 years. We understand there have been a series of court cases decided since then, with sentences ranging from seven to 15 years. It is what you could call an improvement.

Another thing about human rights generally in Jordan is that we get positive leadership from the executive, which is the monarch and his family. They have participated quite actively and openly with respect to women's rights and with respect to stopping the impunity when it comes to things such as honour killings, so we can take some satisfaction there.

Also Jordan has either acceded to or ratified most of the United Nations and significant international conventions that concern rights of women and human rights in general, so the record isn't bad.

Another thing to note in their favour is that when issues are brought to their attention, they welcome them. They participated in this universal periodic review of the Human Rights Council. When you bring issues to them, they are quite responsive, and not simply with rhetoric. They take it under advisement and they work toward improving the situation. The record would show that they have done fairly well on this; it's not perfect, but there is a trend in the correct direction.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Thank you, Mr. Brison.

Go ahead, Monsieur Laforest.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good afternoon to all the witnesses. Thank you for being here.

Mr. Stephenson, you said that two-way trade between Canada and Jordan totalled around $80 million. We are talking about a small market, which causes us to wonder why we should even enter into a free trade agreement.

On the flip side, at least twice, you mentioned the fact that Jordan was a moderate country and a promoter of peace in the Middle East. Is that something that was actually examined? Do you discuss that with Jordan before signing an agreement like this?

[Don Stephenson]

The reasons that we entered into trade agreement talks were largely political, but the discussion itself focused solely on trade and tariff issues.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I am asking because you mentioned it in your presentation.

[Don Stephenson]

Canada’s motivation stems more from a desire to strengthen ties with a model country and to support its economic growth.