I hear the member. Approximately $45 million in postal subsidies are going out to organizations as diverse as the Ontario Corn Producers Association. Those organizations have indicated very clearly to the government that they support the policy and they support the government because they want their voices heard in the Canadian agricultural industry.
This is about the future of Canadian magazines for veterans, Canadian magazines for fishermen, Canadian news magazines, business magazines like BC Business Magazine which has supported the policy put forward by the government, and Canadian scholarly and consumer magazines. This is about making sure that we have Canadian kids magazines to tell stories for our kids.
There is also criticism from those who say the legislation may upset the United States. Those opposite seem to forget the reason they were elected to the Parliament of Canada was to fight for the interest and the survival of their country. Those people who say the legislation will upset the United States must understand the fact that no country on earth has ever imported and read as many magazines per capita as Canada now imports from the United States. The legislation will keep that market open.
No country in the history of the globe has ever exported as many magazines per capita to any other country in the world as has the United States to the Canadian market. We are more open to American magazines than any other country in the world.
Can we imagine the reaction of Americans if they walked into their neighbourhood smoke shop and saw that 80% of the magazines being sold on the rack were Canadian magazines? That is what we would like our American neighbours to think about.
The United States is our closest ally and friend. We welcome American cultural influences with open arms, but we have a responsibility and a legacy to our children to stand up for Canada. With serious respect, we will not subject as has been suggested in some quarters Canada's laws to scrutiny and approval by the United States before we pass them.
Can we imagine the United States Congress putting a bill before parliament before it passed its own legislation? The simple fact is that unless Canadians stand up for culture, who will? Unless Canada stands up for Canadian interests, who will? Of course there are risks in acting but there is a far greater risk in doing nothing.
There is a far greater risk in the cultural cowardice being shown by the members of the Reform Party. There is a far greater risk in failing to stand up for Canada's legitimate interests.
Some critics think that governments should not get involved in policies to help periodicals. But the answer to that is simple: if Canada does not support Canadian culture, if Quebeckers and the Quebec government do not support Quebec culture, who will?
Unless we stand up for our interests who will? Forty years ago there were only a handful of Canadian magazines. The government of Prime Minister Lester Pearson saw a need to act in the national and public interest to create a framework, not to write the magazines, not to censor the magazines and not to block other magazines, but to create a basis for 1,500 Canadian magazines that we all enjoy.
This Christmas I want my daughter to be able to read about Canadian tradition. I want her to read about my sister-in-law's tourtiere. I also want her to read about how I prepare my garden in Canada for our Canadian winters. I do not want her to have to read a magazine that celebrates American holidays, American culture and American values because it is the only choice she has. That is what is at stake.
From L'Actualité to Western Living , from Vancouver magazine to Canadian Geographic , from Maclean's to Canadian Gardening , 1,500 magazines in our country now tell us the story of who we are. They talk about our way of life. They allow us to see the regions of the country we do not have a chance to visit personally. They allow us to read the stories of all the ages, from kindergarten to great-grandparent.
Maybe we could do nothing to ensure the chance for these magazines to survive but we would be the losers. The losers especially would be our children.
The other suggestion by those cultural cowards is that we should test the bill in the courts before we bring it into parliament. I suggest that such an approach compromises the democratic, judicial and parliamentary principles that say that the highest place for laws to be made and the responsibility for those laws reposes in the Parliament of Canada. Those naysayers would tie the hands of parliament and make us hostage to every group that did not like a proposed law.
We will not compromise Canada's basic legislative rights as a nation by seeking external approval from outside governments before legislating in Canada's national interest.
I would like to add to the point made over and over again by the Minister for International Trade. Advertising services are just that, services. Services are subject to the general agreement on services. The measure before parliament is absolutely and completely consistent with Canada's international obligations under that agreement.
I underscore another point that has been made over and over in the past few months. This bill will not oppose any foreign publisher's ability to export products into the Canadian market. We will continue to have and nurture the most open magazine market in the world. This will not affect existing commercial operations.
The objectives of Canada on this matter are fair. The approach taken in this bill is fair. The need for action is clear. The need for speed is vital. There are no taxes proposed by this bill. There are no subsidies in this bill. There is no restriction on the circulation of foreign goods proposed by this bill.
This bill shows that we are committed to regulating advertising services to develop our own policies reflecting the nature of our country and the identity of our people.
Canadian cultural achievements are not a coincidence. Achievements in our culture and our country require the work, the intelligence, the dedication and the creativity of many individuals and of parliament.
To contribute to these achievements, Canadian citizens must resolve to promote Canadian content and to support Canadian culture.
That is why the bill to establish the foreign publishers advertising services act is before parliament. It is not about parliament acting in the government's interest or in parliament's interest. It is about parliament acting in the interests of Canada.
Advertising revenues are the backbone of Canadian magazines and the fuel for a crucial vehicle of social, economic, political and cultural expression of our nation. What we seek as Canadians is a chance to hear our own stories, to see our own creators, to watch our own talent and to hear our own voices at home and abroad.
The new bill before the House is in support of a cultural heritage grounded in history and handed to our generation by generations of parliamentarians who had the courage to make a difference in the past.
This bill upholds longstanding Canadian cultural objectives and it upholds and supports the right of Canada and the right of Canadians to advance and promote Canadian culture and by doing so to advance and promote our identity and our nationhood.
Members of parliament who truly believe that Canada is a nation worth supporting and preserving have no option but to support this legislation.