Debates of May 28th, 2007

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the member has asked a question about the dollars that are being invested in our aboriginal communities in Canada. In the past budget, the minister brought forward $10 billion in spending. This is a substantial increase over previous budgets.

I know that the previous Liberal government left the plight of aboriginal people off its radar for many years. Although the Liberals pretended to bring forward these concerns, it was not until the last moment that they tried to bring forward what many have called a pitiful attempt at the very last moment, and which some people have called the Kelowna accord. We have had that discussion many times in this House. We know that in fact there was no accord. There was no agreement. There was only a press release.

Our minister has moved forward with real funding dollars. On top of those dollars we are going after reform of the system. As I said to the member earlier, hopefully she will be able to come on board.

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this adjournment debate gives me the opportunity to once again share my concerns—and those of my fellow citizens—about a situation that is still going on at the Rimouski office of Service Canada. This situation has to do with the fact that the office has been managed on an interim basis for quite some time from Gaspé, and we have no way of knowing why or for how long.

Why is this worrisome? I will give an example that everyone will understand: Canada summer jobs. This is an excellent example of centralization and bungling. What justifies my comments? Reality.

The minister decided to centralize the handling and processing of applications in Ottawa for private companies and public agencies, and in Montreal for NPOs. However, in Rimouski, among other places, the minister had an organization and competent and experienced public servants who, year after year, were able to process these files. But no, in 2007, the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development had to decide that the program had to be completely overhauled and managed differently. We know the mess that followed.

A week ago, evidently, after an outcry from the agencies—a legitimate one at that—it was decided to take a second look and announce a second round of funding. We should note that the minister is doing so ignoring the criteria that he himself established.

I am using that example to restate my question. The Rimouski office, which serves the huge Bas-Saint-Laurent area, is under interim management out of Gaspé. Its role is changing without notice, consultation or debate. Is what seems to be coming really being done to improve service delivery? The current situation is more akin to control changing hands and centralization, as in the example of Canada summer jobs I cited earlier. Does Rimouski have to kiss permanent management goodbye? Is the lack of action on appointing a director hiding something else?

This is why I have restated my question of May 1 last.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development]

Mr. Speaker, the member asked the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development if the government intended to leave the Rimouski regional Service Canada office without management.

The fact is the Rimouski region is being served better than ever under the new mandate of Service Canada.

Canadians in Rimouski and across the country can access a complete range of government services and benefits in person, by telephone, on line or by regular mail.

Over the last year more than 100 new service points were created across Canada. That means a total of 543 Service Canada centres. Seventy-nine of these are in Quebec. Never before has the presence of the Canadian government been felt in so many regions and communities including throughout Quebec and the member's riding.

The new government has been listening to Canadians who wanted Service Canada to be managed differently. Canadians were looking for better client service and we all wanted to see people helping people.

Listening to Canadians the new government is getting things done. To make Service Canada more efficient and effective in its client service, we moved from administrative and regional centres to making each Service Canada centre a self-sufficient entity responsible for serving Canadians.

In the member's riding there are three managers responsible for serving citizens. Under the former structure there was only one. The member and her constituents will no doubt be relieved to see that we have tripled the resources dedicated to assisting with accessing Government of Canada benefits and programs.

In order to meet the public's needs we have staffed these managers with a large number of citizen service agents in the five Service Canada centres in the Bas-St-Laurent area.

The changes to the roles and responsibilities of Service Canada centre managers are administrative in nature and will in no way jeopardize service or partnerships; in fact, it is quite the opposite. In the member's riding her constituents are already beginning to see ways in which service is improved.

Ninety-three per cent of Canadians now have access to these Service Canada centres. However, we as government believe we can do better than that. So in Quebec we have added 31 mobile sites to the 79 Service Canada centres already in place.

The addition of mobile Service Canada centres is an innovation whose time has come. It is a better use of resources which every taxpayer can appreciate because it offers more access to more people. This is a major and welcome innovation for those communities where it makes more sense for Service Canada to come to the citizens than waiting for the citizens to come to it. As I alluded to earlier, it brings the presence of the Government of Canada into even the most remote parts of Quebec.

Are there changes with the arrival of Service Canada? We have enacted changes that will ensure that Service Canada is a client oriented agency. Canadians want better client service. They want better value for money. They know how to use the Internet and other technologies, but they want reasonable access to service centres and they want and need face to face interaction. That is what Canada's new government has provided.

Canadians, particularly Quebeckers, are practical people. They appreciate that their new government understands them and is listening to them, and we are getting things done.

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will put my question very directly.

By saying that there are now three managers, did the government's spokesperson mean that the director position at the existing office will not be filled and that, from now on, Rimouski will be under interim management?

I would like to raise another point. As far as this range of services is concerned, one has to realize that the situation is not the same everywhere. I was not talking only about my riding. I mentioned that the Rimouski office was serving the Bas-Saint-Laurent area. No passport services, among others, are provided. My colleague MPs and I are very proud to offer such services at our constituency offices, but do not come and tell us about services not provided in the regions.

I also have a third point. We live in a rural area and the fact is that there are residents—there may not be many but there are some—who do not have access to Internet.

So, those are my three other questions.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's supplementary question allows me the opportunity to again highlight some of the government's accomplishments and assure all Canadians, including the people in the hon. member's riding, that they get quality access to services no matter where they live.

Our new government has worked hard to streamline operations at Service Canada in our efforts to provide a client centred model. I would like to state for the record a few of these changes in the House this evening.

We have implemented a service charter. We have implemented a code of service standards. We have implemented an office of client satisfaction. In addition to this we have opened more than 100 new service points across the country and increased the number of service points for official minority communities. Now we have officers who go to remote communities to offer all services to citizens no matter where they live.

Canada's new government is getting the job done. The excellent advances at Service Canada--

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The hon. member for Windsor West.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise this evening and to once again raise the issue of Canada's position with respect to the trade agreement with South Korea. The trade agreement with South Korea would result in the loss of manufacturing jobs across this country and, in particular, in the auto industry.

I have been raising this issue since 2004 when the then prime minister, the member for LaSalle—Émard, entered into negotiations for a trade deal with South Korea.

We are concerned about this trade deal because of the vulnerability of the manufacturing industry. Since 2003, over 250,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost and since January approximately 50,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost, often in the automotive sector.

It is important to note that the present government has not put forth an automotive sector strategy. The Minister of International Trade, a former Liberal and industry minister at the time, promised me a number of times in this chamber, as well as at committee, that he would bring forth an auto policy but he never did. As a Conservative, he has continued the trade negotiation talks with South Korea.

I note the detriment to this, which was basically offered up by Department of Industry officials who admitted in a meeting that South Korea would be out of the deal if they did not get the automotive sector on the plate. Why South Korea wants greater automotive access into Canada is because right now it has non-tariff barriers that actually prevent the sale of Canadian vehicles in South Korea. With the trade deficit being so huge right now I do not know why the Conservative government would want to expand that and create greater problems for the Canadian manufacturing sector. It is beyond me.

We just need to look at the facts. In 2005, South Korea exported 118,000 vehicles to Canada. What did we export into South Korea? We exported 400 vehicles. What an incredible imbalance. This is unacceptable. The government continues to go down a path that will further expose the Canadian market to these vehicles. I think the government is doing it for some type of political gain to say, for example, that it might perhaps beat the Americans to a deal with South Korea.

Even though the United States has concluded negotiations, the truth of the deal is coming out. Many people in the manufacturing sector and the agricultural sector are telling the United States government not to go forward with this plan. What is interesting is the fact that at least the United States congress will have a chance to debate the deal and actually vote on it.

I am asking the government if it will allow Parliament to have the opportunity to see the deal, debate the deal and, more important, vote our conscience on this deal. We need to know how it could affect Canadian manufacturers and Canadian citizens. We should at least get the same opportunity as the United States is giving so there can be accountability. I ask the government to at least do that if it is not going to back away from these negotiations and continues to offer up the automotive sector as a sacrificial lamb at the expense of Canadian workers.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade and Minister of International Cooperation]

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking the hon. member for his interest in the government's efforts to expand export opportunities for Canadian businesses in South Korea through the negotiation of a free trade agreement. The government shares the hon. member's interests.

Indeed, some within the automotive industry are calling on the government to ensure that Canada's ongoing negotiations with Korea result in improved access to Korea's automotive market through the elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers. This is why we have consulted with all interested stakeholders in Canada, including automotive manufacturers and workers, since the negotiations with Korea were first launched. This has included both one on one meetings with stakeholders, as well as regular meetings of a dedicated automotive consultative group that meets in advance of each round of negotiations. These consultations date back almost two years and will continue as long as the negotiations proceed.

I can therefore assure the hon. member that Canada's negotiators are doing their utmost to effectively address the concerns and interests of Canadian stakeholders.

The hon. member is surely well aware of the importance that trade plays in Canada's economy, contributing to over 40% of Canada's gross domestic product.

In “Advantage Canada”, the government's plan to strengthen Canada's economy and make it more competitive, we made clear our determination to pursue bilateral agreements with targeted countries. Canada is unfortunately lagging significantly behind its key competitors, not having concluded a single FTA since 2001. Since then, Canada's main competitors have been aggressively concluding agreements.

The early April conclusion by the United States of an FTA with Korea risks putting Canadian businesses at an unequal footing unless Canada can negotiate a comparable agreement to level the playing field.

Korea also has FTAs with trading partners such as Singapore, Chile and EFTA and ASEAN countries, and will soon begin negotiations with the EU. It is therefore important for Canada to ensure that Canadian exporters and investors have competitive terms of access to Korea's markets.

South Korea is a valued trading partner for Canada and represents a gateway to northeast Asia, a region of strategic importance to global value chains. In 2006 Korea was Canada's seventh largest trading partner, with Canadian exports totalling a record $3.3 billion.

A free trade agreement with Korea would offer the possibility of enhanced market access for a wide range of Canadian goods, services and investment opportunities, including due to Korea's relatively high average tariff.

For example, we expect gains in agriculture, particularly in beef, pork, canola and barley, fish, forestry, medical devices, pharmaceuticals and financial and professional services. In this regard, the government has received broad based support from stakeholders across Canada for FTA negotiations with Korea.

The government is aware of the concerns that have been expressed by the Canadian auto industry with respect to the closed nature of Korea's automotive market. FTA negotiations with Korea provide an excellent opportunity to address industry concerns regarding tariff and non-tariff barriers in Korea.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that simply is not acceptable. Right now we have a $2.6 billion trade deficit with South Korea. Our largest export right now is wood pulp, which is 25¢ per pound, versus Korean vehicles that are shipped into Canada at $15,000 each.

It is important to note that under Liberal and Conservative auto policy we have gone from being a manufacturer with a surplus and a net export to having a deficit, and we have dropped to 10th in the world. That is unacceptable.

As well, with the shutting of the tariff, we see state sponsored Korean automotive companies like Hyundai and Kia getting tens of millions of dollars. On top of that, the government has brought in feebates that will also provide Canadian taxpayer money to these foreign state owned companies. That is unacceptable and it puts auto workers and Canadians out of work.

A prophecy that comes to the conclusion here is when the Minister of Industry himself said that the auto industry would collapse under a Conservative government.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, contrary to statements made by the hon. member, the government is certainly not quietly negotiating trade deals with Korea. Rather, we have been upfront about these negotiations and have consulted with interested industry stakeholders every step of the way, including all segments of the Canadian automotive industry.

An FTA with Korea would help ensure that Canadian manufacturers would have effective access to Korea's automotive market through the elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers.

On this last element, let me be very clear. The government is committed to ensuring that a Canada-Korea FTA creates new opportunities for the Canadian automotive manufacturers.

Importantly, benefits for Canada, however, are not limited to the automotive sector and span a wide range of goods and service sectors and also include potential new investment opportunities.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

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.

(The House adjourned at 6:57 p.m.)