Mr. Speaker, I think it is fair to say that many in the legal field have argued that under agreements like the FTA and the North American Free Trade Agreement certain commodities were clearly excluded. Beer, logs and culture were named as exclusions and therefore, by implication, presumably everything else is left in. Bottled water was also mentioned.
It is clear that once water enters a container for sale it becomes a good, a commodity or a product. Whether that container is a vessel, a canal, a pipeline or whatever, the concern Canadians have is that we are not protected by the present wording of international agreements like NAFTA. I agree with my hon. friend that if the will is there by all countries then we should.
Let us face it, the northern part of Mexico, particularly in the Maquiladora zone where the big industrial belt is now developing as a result of NAFTA, and in the American southwest which is referred to as the sun belt where the large industries and populations are developing in the agricultural sectors, they are running out of water. It is clear that they are running out of freshwater. The wells and rivers are drying up and every conceivable ounce of that surface water is either being used or is locked up in legal agreements.
As those populations increase they are looking north to Canada as their obvious source to bail them out when the time comes, no pun intended. The issue of having as many cards in our hands as we can when the dealing begins is absolutely crucial.
While people will argue that we can pass legislation here banning exports and pass legislation in the provincial legislations of the country or wherever else, that trade agreement between three sovereign nations takes priority over national, state, provincial or local jurisdictions.
We have to do whatever we can to ensure that freshwater is in adequate supply for future generations of Canadians and that is why this motion is before the House of Commons today.