Debates of May 10th, 2000

Pornography

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, maternity and parental benefits are a longstanding part of the Government of Canada's commitment to children and families. These benefits are provided to Quebecers like all other Canadians.

In October 1999 the government indicated that it would extend these benefits to provide greater flexibility to parents to better balance work and family needs. Our priority is to implement our improved parental benefits.

The recent budget announcement on the extended parental benefits now allows parents up to one year of leave instead of the traditional six months. We have also made parental benefits more accessible by lowering the eligibility threshold to 600 hours, about four months on a 40 hour week and five months on a 30 hour week, and giving more flexibility to parents by removing the second waiting period.

In 1997 the Government of Canada did enter into negotiations with Quebec so that it could establish its own parental leave plan. At that time we made a fair and equitable offer to the Government of Quebec but the Government of Quebec walked away from these negotiations. For our part, at the moment our government is focused on providing extended EI maternity and parental benefits to Quebecers and to all other Canadians.

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Mississauga South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is May 10 and a couple of our colleagues have birthdays today. I want to wish them a happy birthday. We are going to share a dinner. They cannot share it with their families at home because they are here working. I want to let everyone know that we are still trying to remain whole even when we cannot be with our families, but we hopefully will make it up in other ways.

Recently I had an opportunity to ask a question of the Minister for International Trade. He is the Minister for International Trade not of international trade. It is a fine distinction. He pointed out to me at a trade exposition in Mississauga a couple of weeks ago that we are for trade.

In preparing for my intervention tonight I pulled out the annual report of the Export Development Corporation which has been getting a lot of attention in the House of late. I wanted to look at the section on increasing Canada's competitiveness. It states:

Canada is enjoying renewed prosperity. Unemployment is at its lowest point in 20 years, inflation is low and under control; private spending is up and fiscal deficits are down. Canada is experiencing robust growth, which is expected to remain strong in 2000. The economy is continuing its shift to the high-tech and services sectors that look set to dominate the 21st century economy.

The combined impact of trade liberalization and growing trade integration within North America have heightened Canada's dependence on trade—

It is that wording, our dependence on trade, that triggered the question. I asked the Minister for International Trade to give us some indicators of how we have benefited from trade and also to deal with the myth that somehow what we produce in Canada for export is ostensibly either low value added or in fact raw materials or commodities and that maybe we are not getting the amplification or the leverage from high quality export trade.

The minister gave some very interesting statistics. He said that our exports now total 41% of Canada's GDP versus 27% just 10 years ago. He also clarified that in fact our commodities exports were down from some 60% some years ago to a low 30%.

In that regard could the parliamentary secretary provide a bit more information about how vital trade is to Canada and possibly how this is going to translate into Canada being more competitive in a global economy?

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister for International Trade has said in the House that among the G-7 nations, Canada benefits the most from trade and therefore is the most open to trade of the G-7 economies. Our exports plus imports add up to the equivalent of over 80% of our GDP. The next closest to us is the United Kingdom at less than 60%.

More of our production at home depends on export markets than any other G-7 country. By the same token we have made the global market our market to a greater extent than any of our competitors.

Finally, we have to see the importance of global markets to Canada's emerging new economy sectors. Our trade numbers show that we are having some success. Some of our new economy exports such as earnings from royalties and licences and research and development have consistently been the strongest components in our services exports. These grew by 16.8% and 15% per year respectively since 1993. Services are the key to the new economy and we are starting to do very well here.

It is true that we ship a lot of rocks and logs. We have and will continue to have a strong comparative advantage in many resource sectors. The numbers show that the relative size of the resource sector in total Canadian exports has fallen over the years. But the good news is that we have not been losing our resource sector. Rather, we have been gaining vibrant manufacturing and services sectors that have become world class competitors in their own right.

This points to what I think is the most significant way in which trade and investment are benefiting Canada. Our integration with the global economy is not type casting us as producers of raw materials. It is paving the way for Canadians to enjoy the benefits of a vastly more diversified economy with more knowledge based economic activity and more rewarding jobs than an inward orientation possibly could offer.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7.15 p.m.)