Water was not mentioned. The evidence has shown that water was never part of the discussions. The negotiators now have admitted that. The politicians involved in the negotiations have said that water was never even mentioned in any serious way.
Therefore, to understand the basis for the inclusion of water in the trade agreements one must first look to the relevant section of the harmonized commodity coding system of GATT. The harmonized commodity coding system for classifying goods for customs tariff and other purposes adopted by the GATT include the following: "2201: It includes waters, including natural or artificial mineral waters and aerated waters not containing sugar or sweetening material nor flavoured, including ice and snow". It then goes on to article 2201(90) and lists all other water.
Let me provide a clarification of this harmonized commodity coding system. The GATT harmonized commodity description and coding system explanatory notes were adopted by the GATT signatories. The explanatory notes state the following: "This heading covers ordinary natural water of all kinds, other than sea water. Such water remains in this heading whether or not it is clarified or purified".
I could recite a whole number of these subsections and the technical aspects of NAFTA, but fundamentally it states that water, under the World Trade Organization and under NAFTA, is considered a commodity or a good. This obviously causes people a great deal of concern.
I think it is fair to say that at a time when NAFTA opens the door to this type of export and knowing that we have to treat, as a result of NAFTA, American and Canadian entrepreneurs on a level playing field and that we cannot discriminate against Americans in favour of Canadians, since Canadians right now are diverting water within the country, exporting water, and selling water in a variety of forms, an American entrepreneur can now use NAFTA and come forward and do the same. They could export water from the North Thompson River in British Columbia to the Los Angeles basin.
I think it is also clear in international law. I am not an international lawyer, but I have talked to many of them. They say that if it comes to a dispute in this area, provincial legislatures will not have much impact. Even national legislation will not have much impact, although this is what we are doing tonight. The provisions of the international trade agreement between three sovereign nations will be paramount if there is a dispute. Of course a dispute settling mechanism panel will take into consideration that the three signatories to the North America Free Trade Agreement have agreed, as per the schedules I have indicated, that water is a commodity, just like coal or codfish or wheat or anything else, to be bought or sold among three countries.
For that reason and to give us some influence at that international dispute settlement mechanism table when the time comes, I think we should pass this legislation to very clearly indicate where the people of Canada stand on this issue.
In closing, I will simply say the following. For Canadians water is something special. I think we all agree that water is a commodity unlike cod or timber or nickel or whatever. It is virtually like blood itself. It is the life of Canada. Water is something very special in the Canadian psyche.
I would urge my colleagues to pass this legislation in order to send a very clear message that this is where Canada stands.