Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest and I am a bit surprised that the hon. member has made statements in this House that are patently false. They are not true.
The hon. member would have individuals believe that the government proceeded with this bill somehow through dark corridors in the dead of night and that parliamentarians were not apprised of the process as it was under way. That is simply not true.
It is important when statements are made which are factually incorrect that it is brought to the attention of the House and the people who are watching this debate. Indeed the member opposite asked why with such haste has this bill gone forward. I do not know where she or her party has been of late but this is simply not the case with this bill.
On November 23, 1994, quite a while ago I would say the member, there was a news release. It was not done in the dark of night. It was put on the wire for the English and French press across the country which indicated that the Prime Minister and the late Prime Minister Rabin officially announced the launching of the trade negotiations.
On November 29 and 30, 1994 the chief negotiator for Canada briefed the federal-provincial trade policy committee and invited input from provincial governments, including the government in Quebec City.
On January 14, the Canada Gazette published the official notice requesting submissions from any interested parties.
On January 23, 1995 the Department of Finance wrote 35 companies and industry reps requesting comments and views regarding negotiations, particularly on things like rules of origins. Some of those companies were in the province of Quebec.
There were at least a dozen SAGITs, industry meetings that took place, and those representatives are from the sectoral industries right across Canada.
On June 23, 1995 Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada distributed a working paper on Israel's agriculture and trade to the federal-provincial agricultural trade policy committee and the agricultural food and beverage SAGITs, again representing that particular sector right across the country.
On January 12, 1996 another news release: "Canada and Israel officials reach tentative agreement on the proposed trade deal".
On January 19, 1996 the chief negotiator held a conference call with the provinces. And so on and so on down until June 11, 1996 when the rules of origin negotiated provides update to all of the provinces at the seed trade meetings.
On July 31 a news release was made stating that Canada and Israel signed the free trade deal.
In addition to that, the Bloc Quebecois caucus, the Reform Party caucus, the Liberal Party caucus and anybody who had an interest was offered a briefing by the senior officials who had negotiated this deal.
In addition to that, the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, on which we have three members from the Bloc Quebecois, did a vigorous examination of this bill.
The second thing she indicated, which I find misleading, is that the government is hiding something in this bill, otherwise why did it not pass the amendments of the Bloc Quebecois. I will tell the member that if her House leadership, at least those individuals in the research bureau who are supposed to know about proper form and content, would have looked at those amendments that were put at committee they would have found that they were clearly out of order. The reason those amendments were not put and voted upon is they were not in the proper form. They exceeded the scope of the bill. The chairman of the committee, who has as much authority in committee as the Speaker does in this place, indicated quite clearly that these motions were not in order. There was nothing nefarious about that. Nobody changed clerks in the middle of the stream to try to somehow subvert the rights and privileges of members of that committee. It was all above board and done according to the rules.
The last thing I want to say to the hon. member, which I think is important, is this is about trade for Canadian companies. There are real Canadian companies out there. Some of them may be in Dartmouth, some in Montreal, some in Winnipeg or some in North Bay, as I said before, that are having difficulty accessing this market. To indicate that somehow the Government of Canada has put trade ahead of those other very important issues like peace in the Middle East belies the facts. This government and our Minister of Foreign Affairs have been steadfast in his determination to use the goodwill that Canada has abroad to promote the peace process at every opportunity.
Concurrent with these negotiations and subsequent to these negotiations, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Prime Minister and other ministers of this government have made it extremely clear that it is Canada's wish and desire that the peace process continue, that it get back on track and that there is a successful conclusion to those negotiations.
With respect to human rights and other issues that the member has raised, this government has always been concerned about human rights but we fundamentally believe that a policy of exclusion means that if there are human rights violations in any jurisdiction they will only get worse. We do not follow that policy with Cuba nor with a number of other countries. The members opposite agree with the government's policy.
With respect to Israel and human rights, vis-à-vis the Israelis and the Palestinians, the Canadian government has been very clear. We have sent messages to both sides. We have said, in each and every instance, that the solution to the problems in the Middle East and more globally in other nations does not come from a policy of exclusion and containment but from one of inclusion and dialogue. Trade is one of the routes by which we can do that. We have done it successfully in the past and we will continue to do it.
I hope the member recognizes that members of her party have sat on this committee and have contributed a great deal. They understand what this is all about.
I hope that she will correct the record. There has not been an attempt by the government to hide this very public deal.