Agreed.
Evidence of meeting #13 for International Trade in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clause.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #13 for International Trade in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clause.
A video is available from Parliament.
9:10 a.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
(Clauses 6 to 212 inclusive agreed to)
This is a wonderful committee.
We're now looking at a new clause which Mr. Manly and the Green Party have proposed.
Do you wish to speak to it, Mr. Manly?
9:10 a.m.
Green
Paul Manly Green Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC
This clause doesn't change the agreement. It changes the way the committee reports on the agreement.
Given the debate I've heard in the House of Commons about this agreement, there has been a lot of discussion about transparency. I've heard from the Conservatives that they want to see economic reports. I've heard from the Liberals that in the past they weren't happy with the way agreements were negotiated because they felt they were left out. I think this just adds a level of transparency to reviewing the agreement after it's been signed and ratified and that we can see the socio-economic benefits or drawbacks of the agreement.
Proposed clause 212.1 reads:
(1) Within two years after the day on which this section comes into force and every two years after that, a review of the socio-economic impacts of the Agreement on Canadians and on the Canadian economy, broken down by industry sector, is to be undertaken by the committee of the Senate, of the House of Commons or of both Houses of Parliament that may be designated or established for the purpose of the review. (2) The committee is to submit a report containing any findings or recommendations that it considers appropriate to the House or Houses of Parliament of which it is a committee.
As we move forward into the review of the agreement, this will help Parliament understand the impacts of the agreement. As we move towards that 16-year renegotiation period, we're going to have a better understanding of the impacts for Canadians and Canadian industry.
Thank you.
9:15 a.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
I think the spirit is good. Is this the right place to do it? I think as a committee we automatically determine that fate among ourselves. If we decide we want to take on that review, we can do that at any point. It doesn't have to be a specific period.
In this agreement there is a review in five years, regardless. We will abstain.
9:15 a.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
I want to echo the comments about transparency. Some of the testimony we heard yesterday talked about how, at the moment, a lot of these mechanisms, whether it's getting an economic impact assessment or whether it's how we consult on trade agreements depends on the culture of the government of the day. Even when you have governments that are doing it relatively better than other governments, there's no guarantee in that. This would provide for a mandatory review.
We know there is a sunset clause. That means we are going to be looking at the agreement at some point. It would be good to have that economic information. We know that sometimes you don't get it in a timely way. That point has been belaboured here. I won't do it again. This would be a way of ensuring that we get that information in a timely way, as the negotiations open up as a result of the sunset clause in the agreement, whether people want it there or not.
That's why I'll be supporting the amendment today.
February 27th, 2020 / 9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Terry Sheehan Liberal Sault Ste. Marie, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Manly, for participating in these very important committee meetings.
One of the things we have heard over and over again since I've been at this and right from the get-go, in particular with the section 232 tariffs on steel and whatnot, is that when Trump first positioned this, he wanted it to sunset in five years. We heard loud and clear from businesses and unions that they need certainty and that to constantly be at this would not be good. So, we negotiated, as you know, the 16 years, but there is that review in five years. It was not a bad thing. It was not a full sunset; however, there is that review in five years. When you're reviewing in five years it means you're probably getting ready the year before to review it, so it's constant.
I think Mr. Hoback made an excellent comment. It means that we can review this at any time—in two weeks, not two years, or in two months, if we felt it necessary—and that goes for the Senate as well. There already is that mechanism to review things earlier. If it is seen by any member that it is pertinent, then I think we should.
Therefore, because we heard so much over the last number of years about needing certainty for a certain amount of time and not such a short time, we'll be voting against it.
Thank you very much for your participation. I think this particular NAFTA deal with its green clauses and green parts of it is pretty exciting moving forward.
Again, thank you very much for your amendment, but we will not be supporting it for those reasons.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Yes, you may.
(Amendment negatived: nays 5; yeas 2)
(Clause 213 agreed to)
(Schedules 1 to 5 inclusive agreed to)
Now on to the short title. The new NAFTA, how's that?
9:15 a.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
It reads, “This Act may be cited as the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation Act.”
Shall the short title carry?
9:15 a.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
9:15 a.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
9:15 a.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
9:15 a.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
We are going to try as a team to present the bill at 10 o'clock when the House convenes.
9:15 a.m.
Some hon. members
Hear, hear!
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Wonderful. Thank you to all of the wonderful people who have done all of this excellent work for us, our support staff.
Mr. Hoback.
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
I just want to say thank you to all the staff and all the team for all the hard work.
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you to our staff, to people in the kitchen, to the clerks, to the translators. It's been a heavy couple of weeks, but they've all done a wonderful job.
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
