International Trade Committee on Oct. 4th, 2012

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, we won't be supporting this motion. It's pretty basic stuff. The labour and environment side agreements are put in there to make sure that labour standards and environmental standards aren't degraded to give a competitive advantage to either Canada or Panama.

I would say that it's very difficult for mature economies to put their environmental standards on emerging economies. Certainly we don't want the environmental standards in Panama to lessen. Under our agreement, they cannot lessen, but they can improve. There's room for improvement.

We would expect that it's a naturally occurring cycle. When Panamanians are better off, as they will be through this free trade agreement, and they have more money in their pockets, they can increase their environmental regulatory regime if they choose. In the meantime, we're assured that it won't be any less than it is today.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I agree with Mr. Keddy that the agreement obligates the parties to not reduce their environmental standards. That's clear. What if one party doesn't live up to that? That's the issue.

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

You can't trade that commodity.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

No, the issue is that if they reduce their environmental standards, there should be a penalty of some type.

Why do we have a $15 million penalty in the labour agreement? Why the inconsistency? Why do we say that if you lower labour standards, you're subject to a fine of up to $15 million, but if you lower your environmental standards, it's nothing?

My third and final point is that nothing in what I'm saying in this motion obligates the parties to have the same environmental standards. We're not trying to impose Canadian environmental standards on Panama. What the agreement calls for, in my reading, is that the parties' environmental standards, as they exist, are not to be lowered to attract investment or trade. It doesn't suggest that they be at the same level; it's that they won't go lower.

Again, our very reasonable amendment would say that we do the same thing to the environment agreement that we've done to the labour agreement and give that obligation some teeth in case it's abrogated. Right now, absolutely nothing would happen if Panama or Canada lowered environmental standards.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Go ahead, Mr. Holder, very quickly.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

I'd like to remind members that Panama has already signed this deal. They're waiting for us to proceed, and once again we're throwing in another condition. Frankly, I think that puts it all into question. I think it becomes an extension of a plan that is not our intent. I think it puts P.E.I. farmers at a disadvantage. We had that discussion at the last meeting. It disadvantages Canada. Again, I think it's time to get on with this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Shall the motion carry?

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I would like a recorded vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Okay. All in favour?

(Motion negatived: nays 7; yeas 4)

We will now move to clause-by-clause consideration of the bill.

We leave clause 1, the title, and the definitions.

For clause 3 to clause 6 there are no amendments. I don't see why we can't do them in one sweep.

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

I have a point of clarification.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Yes, go ahead.

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

What you're doing is asking for permission to carry all the clauses that aren't amended.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

We could do that.

Mr. Keddy has just indicated that he'd be prepared to look at all the clauses that aren't amended.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Do you want to put that to one vote?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Yes.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Then I'd ask for a recorded vote, that's all.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Okay. That will be what we'll do. We'll take all of the unamended clauses.

(Clauses 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, and clauses 16 to 65 inclusive, and schedules 1 to 10 inclusive agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Very good. The motion is carried.

(On clause 7—Purpose)

That takes us to clause 7. You have a motion to amend. It's NDP-3 in your package.

Go ahead, Mr. Keddy.

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

I thought that the first amendment was on clause 2, line 7. Will we go back to that?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

We'll go back to that one. We are going to clause 7 and amendment NDP-3.

Mr. Davies, this is your amendment.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

It is. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

This is a bit of a housekeeping amendment that relates to a further amendment. It says:That Bill C-24, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 7 on page 2 the following:

“sustainable development" means development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

I'm sorry, you have the wrong amendment. It's NDP-3.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Is there a reason we're not doing—

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

We'll come back to the definition. Some of the amendments could determine a change to that, so we'll come back to it.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Okay, pardon me.

This is—