Evidence of meeting #112 for International Trade in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was mercosur.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

Sorry?

9:05 a.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

But time allocation won't be used to pass it before summer?

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

I can say we will introduce legislation and we will respect the parliamentary process as it should be.

9:05 a.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Is that a yes or a no?

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

It's as clear an answer as one can give.

9:05 a.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Well, you're the government, so it's the government that decides whether time allocation is used or not, so I think it's fair to ask you, as the responsible minister, whether there are plans—

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

I appreciate it's a fair question, and my answer is as fair as your question.

I'm saying we will introduce legislation and we will follow the parliamentary process. Our intention is to have it done promptly, because I think there would be SMEs in your own riding, and certainly workers in your own riding, who would benefit from having an expanded market.

9:05 a.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

There is not a person in my riding who says time allocation should be used to pass enabling legislation for the TPP before the summer.

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

I'm sure if you were to talk to your constituents, you would find some of them would say that having a trade agreement open up the market in the Asia-Pacific is something they would benefit from.

9:05 a.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

All I'm talking about is before summer. I'm not talking about not passing the legislation in the fall.

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

I can only tell you we will introduce legislation, and we will proceed expeditiously with the rest.

June 5th, 2018 / 9:05 a.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Well, that's a disappointing answer. I hear more people in my riding talk about concern about government abusing time allocation than I do people saying that TPP enabling legislation has to be passed by a certain deadline.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that, but I was hoping to get a commitment here today.

I'm also wondering why it is that workers should feel that they can trust your government when it comes to defending their rights in trade agreements. My understanding is that prior to the election of Donald Trump, you were meeting with representatives from the building trades who were highlighting important problems with chapter 12 of the TPP. The line at that time was that you agreed very much, but geez, it was too bad that the TPP was already negotiated and was a done deal. Then there was an opportunity to renegotiate TPP, and chapter 12 didn't change.

Chapter 12, of course, reproduces a lot of the worst abuses of the temporary foreign worker program. It's going to allow companies to bring workers in under all sorts of categories without any vetting, tracking, or standards assessment by Canadian governments, whether provincial or federal.

I'm wondering why it is workers should feel that they should trust you when you, at one point, or your government, certainly, were admitting the problems with chapter 12, and then completely passed up the opportunity to do anything about them when the negotiations for CPTPP came around.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

Thank you for the question. I appreciate it, because labour is probably the group I meet with the most often.

As I said, when we did Mercosur, I was the first minister of a foreign government to meet with labour in that country regarding a trade agreement. It was the same thing in Argentina.

I also hosted the L7 in Ottawa.

9:10 a.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Be more focused on the results, rather than window dressing.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

Yes, I'll come to your question. I met with Canada's Building Trades Unions, and I even spoke at their conference. What we're doing is taking on board what they wanted. What they wanted was stellar enforcement of the rules we have. We want labour mobility, but certainly we want to preserve the integrity of the labour market in Canada. We have agreed with them on a way forward, and we're looking with our civil service at how we can implement what we've been discussing.

9:10 a.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Part of the problem is that this wording isn't in the agreement, so the agreement is very explicit that Canadian governments won't require any kind of standards qualification.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

I would challenge you on that, and I'll refer you to the text. The text is very clear that people who come into this country would have to pay the same labour rates as we have. They need to come with experience, they need to have specialized skills, and we're working with the building trades. The concern they had—

9:10 a.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

The text of the agreement says:

Canada shall grant temporary entry and provide a work permit or work authorisation to [these workers]...and will not: (a) require labour certification tests or other procedures of similar intent as a condition for temporary entry; or (b) impose or maintain any numerical restriction relating to temporary entry.

I think that's pretty clear in terms of Canada's right to impose any kind of test on the qualification of workers coming into Canada. Wouldn't you agree, Minister?

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

I'm quite familiar with the text, by the way. What I can say is that what we've agreed to with the Building Trades Unions is to make sure that the enforcement, which is their concern.... I met with them, so—

9:10 a.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

So, why is it—

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Mr. Blaikie, your time is up. We're going to move on.

I remind members that there's nothing wrong with a bit of debate, and the minister can handle himself, but I'd like to see some respect back and forth for giving time for the minister to answer the questions. Have your questions lined up, and—

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

If you want me to answer, I'm happy to answer.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

No, we're going to move over to the Liberals. If there's time in the next round, we can entertain that question again.

Madame Lapointe, you have the floor.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, everyone. It is a pleasure for us to have you here today.

Mr. Minister, I have five minutes and two questions to ask you.

We studied Mercosur and the Pacific Alliance. We met with several witnesses. Earlier, you mentioned that you wanted the Mercosur agreement to become the benchmark for potential agreements throughout South America. What does this mean for you?

You talked about a progressive trade agenda. I'd like to hear more about that. Knowing that there is currently some political instability in South America, I would like to know what effect this may have on the negotiations.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

Thank you for the question.

Ms. Renart will be able to speak to you in more detail about our meeting with the negotiators, but when we started negotiating, our basic principle was to have an ambitious and modern agreement that would serve as a model. We didn't just want to replicate what already existed, but to try to establish a progressive model agreement in South America that would set the tone. That is sort of what we have done in the case of the free trade agreement with Europe, the CETA, with regard to the chapters on the environment and labour law, for example. We have done the same about corporate social responsibility and the rules that will govern SMEs. In other words, we want to have an agreement in this part of the world that will incorporate the best elements that have been developed in international agreements.

The underlying objective is that everyone, both trade unions and civil society, feel that they are part of this effort to set the tone.

For example, Uruguay is a very progressive country. It was the first country in the world, along with Chile, to have a free trade agreement that included a chapter on gender equality. Canada was the second country in the world to do so, thanks to the Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement. Now we want to inspire other Mercosur trading bloc countries to adopt the same practices. This would not only make it possible to have an agreement that meets the demands of civil society there, but also to set the tone.

As I said earlier to our colleague Mr. Blaikie, it was a great first to meet the unions and civil society from day one. As you can imagine, it was a great first for Paraguay that a minister from a foreign government met with the unions on the first day. It was the same thing in Argentina. It set the tone. Of course, these people talk to their national elected officials. In my opinion, the circumstances were right for this part of the world to have one of the most progressive agreements.