House of Commons Hansard #46 of the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was relationship.

Topics

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

Mario Silva Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to speak to the motion brought before the House by my colleague, the hon. member for Ajax—Pickering, on the Canada-U.S. border.

Much of what we are debating today may sound familiar because, quite frankly, it is. The issue of our relationship with the United States is an integral part of our history and it is essential that we continue to have these important debates.

Historians will recall that early American presidents, such as John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, held a very specific view with respect to Canada, then of course British North America. To these American leaders, it was only a matter of time before their northern neighbour would be absorbed into the United States. Indeed in his time, Jefferson spoke of “the acquisition of Canada this year”. We know, of course, that this scenario did not materialize, but what did develop was a unique and deeply interdependent relationship operating at the level of finance and mutual security.

The impact of American culture has also been profound, as it has been on much of the world. There have been many leaders over the years who have spoken somewhat poetically of the Canadian-American relationship. It is indeed true that by virtue of geography, we have by necessity become partners on the vast North American continent.

However, like any relationship, whether between two people or hundreds of millions of people, work is required to make it work. One of the best observations I have read was by former president Harry S. Truman, who said:

Canadian-American relations for many years did not develop spontaneously. The example of accord provided by our two countries did not come about merely through the happy circumstance of geography. It is compounded of one part proximity and nine parts good will and common sense.

With this in mind, it is clear that the key to continued success, and indeed improved relationships, lies in a recognition of our importance to each other and also a greater understanding at all levels.

It is certainly unhelpful to hear comments like those made recently by the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to those responsible for the 9/11 attacks. In stating that these individuals travelled through Canada to the United States, she put forward a myth that is completely inaccurate but which, for many Americans, is nonetheless what they believe. Clearly, when the secretary responsible for border policy makes such statements, there is certainly reason for concern. Indeed, even the Republican presidential candidate in the last election had made similar comments.

I mention this not to incite anger or to harp upon the issue, but because it is important that such misconceptions not be allowed to go unchallenged. If they are not corrected, such beliefs will affect border policy as it develops. I give credit to the Canadian ambassador in Washington, Michael Wilson, for his clear and direct efforts to correct this misconception.

The reality of our cross-border relationship in economic terms is really quite staggering. Each day there is over $1.53 billion in trade. Our annual trading relationship totals $560 billion. Almost 300,000 people cross the Canadian-American border every day. Anyone who has driven to the United States can attest to the seemingly endless lines of transport trucks that cross the frontier on both sides. These numbers are not just statistics. They are a portrait of the depth of our relationship and the reality of our mutual dependence.

While there are many who express concerns about our interdependence, the reality is also that more often than not, the Canadian-American experience has been one that is mutually beneficial. However, as noted before by President Truman, relationships like this one require a great deal of work. It is not enough to simply say that we are neighbours. We must also ensure that we remain the best of friends.

Our proximity to the United States has provided us the opportunity to have unique and unparalleled access to the world's largest economic power. Similarly, the United States has benefited from having a friend along the world's longest undefended border.

Following the conclusion of the first world war and the Paris peace talks, the United States began its emergence as a superpower both economically and militarily. We here in Canada have benefited since then from our mutual relationship, but we must also be aware of our need to work diligently on our relationship with the United States.

Over the years there have been and continue to be many issues that we have had to work on; the United States tariffs during the 1930s Depression, the turbulent period during the Nixon presidency when relationships were quite cold, the free trade agreement and the softwood lumber issues, disputes over Arctic sovereignty matters and cultural policy are but a few of the major concerns.

Now we face a rather serious one relating to the border and specifically how border security policy will impact cross-border trade. In times of economic uncertainty it seems that many American political leaders move toward notions of protectionism. An example is the buy American program recently proposed which was more about restricting access to the American market than about encouraging Americans to buy domestically produced goods.

In response to this we need to point out the facts with respect to our unique and interdependent relationship.

Canada has been the leading export destination for 35 of the United States and was in the top three for 46 states. At the same time a study commissioned several years ago indicated that upward of 5.3 million American jobs depended on Canadian-American trade. These numbers include approximately 600,000 jobs in California, 189,000 in Florida and almost 350,000 in New York. These are significant numbers of jobs. It is essential that these facts be considered when United States policy makers review the implications of revising border policy.

In the difficult realities of a struggling economy, it is often easier to look to apparently simple solutions like trade restrictions and tighter borders. The realities as shown by history are that these simply do not work. Indeed, the tariffs of the 1930s are generally recognized to have deepened and prolonged the Great Depression, delaying recovery for years.

Canada does have its friends in the United States who recognize the importance of our relationship. Many of the representatives who are elected from border states have been quite vocal in the need to keep our borders porous enough to support our great trading relationship.

Congresswoman Louise Slaughter from the Buffalo area has spoken out about her concerns over the June 1 deadline for all land travellers to have a passport. While 50% of Canadians hold a passport, only 28% of Americans do. We, like Americans, must recognize the impact of such policies on the tourism sector alone in both countries.

The government and indeed all of us in the House must work diligently to protect our relationship with the United States. Geography has made us neighbours but only our best efforts will ensure that our unique relationship continues to serve both our nations and our people well.

Quite simply, neither Canada nor the United States can afford policies that put our trading relationship at risk. This also applies to all other aspects of the Canadian-American experience.

Although we are in difficult economic times, geography, history and hard work by well-intentioned leaders has made North America the most successful trading relationship the world has ever seen. We must not allow narrow and short-sighted policies on either side of the border to threaten what has been for the most part a success story of historic proportions.

I encourage the government to ensure that Canada's voice is heard in Washington and that we are diligent in promoting the importance of the Canadian-American relationship.

History has laid at our doorstep another of those pivotal moments when we are called to demonstrate leadership in the face of adversity and vision in the storm of uncertainty.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:40 p.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's speech was a very thoughtful one.

I was actually there when the ambassador made that statement and I thought it was a very strong statement. I want to publicly commend Ambassador Wilson for the strength of his statement and the careful way in which he phrased it. He delivered that message about as effectively as I think an ambassador could deliver a message.

I am somewhat more disturbed, however, by the minister who apparently was prepared to share chuckles with the secretary, meanwhile leaving Ambassador Wilson to actually deliver the message.

I would be interested in the hon. member's comments as to whether he thinks that the government should take a more proactive approach with respect to the rather unfortunate and regrettable comments by Secretary Napolitano.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mario Silva Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, I do agree with my colleague. We are asking for the government to take a much more proactive stand. We are grateful for the comments that the ambassador has made, but we are very disturbed by the remarks of the secretary of homeland security.

The government has to do everything it can to contact everybody it knows in the Obama administration to make sure that these types of statements do not have legs. When these myths and misinformation get started, they tend to generate other discussions about the Canada-U.S. relationship which are totally not based on facts.

We need to make sure that the government does everything it can. The minister has to be serious about this issue. This is an important matter that could have serious and significant impacts on both our economies.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:45 p.m.

Conservative

Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have another follow-up question because I did not get the appropriate answer from the member for York South—Weston.

I want to ask the Liberal member if he could help me understand how calling the Americans “idiots” and “morons”, and other words that I will not repeat, during the last Liberal administration, helped develop our relationship? How was it that all of the other true supporters of our friends to the south were able to make it to Washington to lend their support, but the previous Liberal government was unable to get there? The member for York South—Weston suggested it did not want to involve itself in a photo op.

I would suggest that Americans were expecting Canadians to be there after 9/11, but it took us three weeks. The former Liberal prime minister could not fit ground zero, where thousands of Americans lost their lives, into his schedule because he had to make it back to a Liberal Party fundraiser.

It is this Conservative government that has put our relationship with the Americans back on track. It is this government that has left the border open to--

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

The hon. member for Davenport.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:45 p.m.

Liberal

Mario Silva Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, I tried to make my speech non-partisan, but I will not do the same thing in my answer. The reality is that we have an important relationship with the U.S. All of us have spoken to that fact. We have to do everything we can.

I was pleased to speak to this important motion presented by my hon. colleague from Ajax—Pickering. This is a serious debate that we are having here in the House. We are talking about the future of our country. The economic situation facing us is quite dire at this very moment. If we do not get serious about this initiative and get the government to become more proactive, we are going to have some serious problems economically.

We are here to do everything possible for our constituents and to make sure that we have a better relationship. It is so important and so vital to the economic interest of this country.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:45 p.m.

Conservative

Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Thornhill.

I am happy to have this chance to reply to the motion proposed by the hon. member. It alleges that the government has failed to take all necessary steps to ensure that our American friends understand the critical importance of our shared border to trade and economic security and emphasizes that the government must ensure that the Canada-U.S. border remains secure and efficient and is managed in a way that reconciles a great variety of personal, commercial and national security interests.

Let me be the first today to reject the allegation that the government has not done everything it could to ensure that the American government understands we are determined to guarantee the security and accessibility of the border. Today’s debate will show in fact that a host of extensive bilateral discussions are currently underway about our shared border and everything leads us to believe that they will continue to progress.

The Canada Border Services Agency, the CBSA, manages the flow of travellers and goods across the border in order to protect the sovereignty, security, health and prosperity of Canada. Of course, it is a bit more complicated than that. Every year, the CBSA manages the flow of almost 100 million people across the border and clears about 13 million commercial shipments and more than 32 million courier packages through customs, worth a total of about $400 billion.

Although most of this work is done at 20 main land-border crossings, 14 international airports, three mail centres and four large marine container terminals, the CBSA provides services at 1,200 different locations all across the country, including 119 border crossings and hundreds of other land terminals, small airports and vessel reporting stations.

The CBSA is also responsible for enforcing the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which means it handles thousands of claims for refugee status, detains people who could pose a threat to Canada, and removes people who are inadmissible to Canada. It must be aware of thousands of lookouts for people of interest, contraband and dangerous goods. It also handles cases covered by security certificates, which are an essential method of protecting Canada against terrorist attacks.

The CBSA also administers our trade laws and agreements, enforces trade remedies that help protect Canadian industry, and collects duties and taxes on imported goods. All these responsibilities make the CBSA's work very complicated and wide-ranging.

Over the past two decades, under both Liberal and Conservative governments, Canada has embraced free trade as a driver of economic prosperity and gained a reputation as a welcoming country for those seeking a better life. Attention at the border has gradually shifted from collecting import duties to emerging challenges related to contraband, illegal migration, health and safety, criminal and terrorist threats, and facilitating cross-border trade and commerce, the lifeblood of our economy.

Canada is a trading country and our ability to sustain and enhance our international trade capacity is key to our continued prosperity. However, let it be clear: security is job one at the border.

The events of 9/11, Canada's subsequent and continuing mission in Afghanistan, and the arrest and prosecution of suspected terrorists within our own borders have all sharpened our focus on issues of public safety and national security. We know that Canada is not immune from a terrorist attack and that we must constantly be on guard. We recognize our critical role in contributing to the security of Americans. As our hon. Prime Minister has stated, “There is no such thing as a threat to the national security of the United States that does not represent a direct threat to Canada”.

The CBSA works within a robust and sophisticated border management framework that employs a scientific approach to risk assessment and detection. CBSA risk management is multilayered based on pre-approval programs to facilitate low-risk people and goods, advance information on people and goods coming to Canada, and risk-based intelligence. The idea is to push the border out to the extent possible to extend the enforcement of border policy to ports of departure around the world rather than strictly at points of arrival here in Canada.

This concept of pushing the border out is important. It is crucial that we try to discharge our security responsibilities not only where they will have the maximum impact from a security perspective but also with the minimum degree of intrusion or cost to business or individuals. The CBSA mandate contains parallel obligations to Canadians: secure the border and facilitate travel and trade. For just over five years, the agency has addressed these commitments simultaneously and with equal resolve. This is no small challenge, but the CBSA has done an excellent job.

The CBSA has made enormous progress in integrating parts of the old customs, immigration and agriculture inspection organizations amid an unprecedented intensification of the security environment. In response to its dual mandate, the CBSA has introduced a number of innovative programs, which another speaker will outline a little later.

We have generally kept up with the United States at all stages of our high priority technology, systems and programs. We have implemented complementary strategies and maintained excellent inter-agency cooperation at all levels.

However, more remains to be done, together, to ensure that the 49th parallel continues to be a secure, efficient gateway for travellers and goods moving in both directions.

The CBSA now has a lot of human resources working on intelligence-related activities. It is setting new priorities and installing new systems that will help it focus its efforts better. The CBSA must also determine where it could invest abroad over the next five years. Its success will depend increasingly on its ability to gather foreign intelligence and forward that intelligence as quickly as possible to decision-makers.

In closing, it is the opinion of this government, gathered in direct consultation with our American colleagues, that Canada has taken all reasonable measures to ensure that the White House and Congress understand the importance of our shared border to trade and economic security in both Canada and the United States. Aside from words, both governments understand and appreciate the CBSA's actions on the ground toward a safe and secure border.

As we manage the flow of people and goods, we gain a better understanding of not only trade and travel patterns but criminal tendencies as well. This, in turn, allows us to improve our programs and policies in defence of public safety. Our ultimate objective is border safety and security that is sustainable in the context of our civil liberties and economic prosperity.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

Mr. Speaker, if the government is doing everything it can, then how does the member explain that Secretary Napolitano is talking about treating the Canadian border with equivalence to the Mexican border? How can he explain the fact that in the House the minister says that there is no problem, yet every editorial in the country says there is a huge problem?

The former ambassador to the United States said that this problem had gone viral. The current ambassador to the United States, appointed by the Prime Minister, said that it was a huge problem and he encountered again and again. Yet what we hear in the House is there really is no problem. In fact, today the Minister of Public Safety did what the member just did. He talked about 9/11 and why we should be afraid.

We are talking about the Canada-U.S. border. We are talking about the flow of goods between these two nations. There has not been an incident since 9/11. In fact, there has not been an incident in a decade, when the individual involved was detained and dealt with. Why does the member not talk about that? Why does he raise the spectre of 9/11 and fear, while talking about the Canada-U.S. border, instead of talking about the fact that there are no incidences and that we need to work closer and remove these barriers to trade?

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:55 p.m.

Conservative

Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has a tendency to see the glass always half empty or even one-quarter empty. The truth is we have made great progress with our neighbours to the south. In fact, our Minister of International Trade is currently in the U.S.A as we speak, building upon the great relationship we had with the former administration and now with the current administration.

Maybe part of the reason why that party is over there is because it did not know how to deal with our neighbours to the south. One of our colleagues talked about the Liberals' method of operations, but that did not work very well as we know. If I am not mistaken, a member left their caucus over the very comments she made about Americans to the south. Therefore, we do not need to take any lessons from the member or anyone on that side about how to build a relationship with our great neighbours to the south.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6 p.m.

NDP

Jim Maloway NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Mr. Speaker, the government must develop and implement a national tourism strategy, which must contain an extension of passport expiry time from five to ten years, increase accessibility to obtaining a passport through driver's licence bureaus and other alternative government locations. We also want significantly to reduce the price to obtain a passport. We are suggesting free passports for those under the age of 18. Right now a family of four is looking at over $300 for passports. I do not think people are going to be overly quick to spend that. We also suggest free passports for veterans and half-price passports for seniors. I suggest the government even consider a 90-day period where it would provide free passports.

In addition to having the government consider these issues, how many NEXUS cards are in existence? Either members do not know or they will not say.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6 p.m.

Conservative

Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON

Mr. Speaker, many of those very suggestions have been discussed. They are good suggestions and they are the kind of thing on which the government is working.

We believe in facilitating Canadians crossing the border. We believe in facilitating trade across the border and having the Americans visit us. He mentioned tourism. We are big on tourism. We want American tourists to come and tour this wonderful country. With the co-operation of the parties opposite, we will be able to do that. In the spirit we want to set with this, the member as well as other members should look at how we could better enhance our relationship with the Americans and go forward collectively together so we can build strong relationships and maybe make that border a little less ornery.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

April 27th, 2009 / 6 p.m.

Thornhill Ontario

Conservative

Peter Kent ConservativeMinister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas)

Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure to rise in the House today for this important debate. The government certainly recognizes the importance of maintaining an efficient and secure border with the United States. Good border management is critical for Canada because it supports our trade flows. It also supports the people to people relationships that have been build over the years, friends, family and colleagues from communities in each country who rely on efficient, secure and effective borders to maintain these relationships.

I can assure this House that the border was at the top of our list of many things to discuss with the new American administration.

As one would expect, it is also a major concern for the business community on both sides of the border.

We have listened closely to their concerns, including through the North American Competitiveness Council, NACC, and through other stakeholders that are worried about increasing unilateral U.S. security-related measures. Those measures cost money. They cost time. They eat away at the effectiveness of our cross-border trade.

The situation is compounded by a series of other challenges, including the current economic downturn, volatile energy and commodity costs, currency fluctuation and labour shortages.

Furthermore, both Canadian and American companies are concerned about the repercussions of the new rules and fees paid at the American border on our manufacturing exports. We are attacking these problems in many ways.

Senior officials across government meet on a regular basis through a range of channels to seek innovative means of managing a border that is both secure and efficient. During President Obama's visit to Canada, the Prime Minister and President Obama instructed senior officials to launch a renewed dialogue on border management.

We were encouraged to learn that senior U.S. officials, including Department of Homeland Security deputy secretary Jane Holl Lute, are seeking a new dialogue with Canada on border issues involving a key range of departments and agencies. These measures are positive developments and they will play an important role in Canada's ongoing efforts. Since 9/11, Canada has spent some $10 billion on enhancing our side of the border.

We will also invest $75 million over the next two years to ensure that the CBSA has the resources it needs to deliver efficient and secure border services at more than 1,200 domestic and international locations.

These funds are being used to increase the number of on-site border services officers at key border sites and to meet evolving operational demands resulting from increased trade and travel.

We have also proposed an additional two year $165 million spending package that includes $26 million to introduce microchip biometric data in Canada's passports, also known as the e-passport. This project will be piloted in late 2008. It also includes secure visa issuance processes. That means Canada will be joining 42 other countries in their efforts to safeguard passports against tampering.

In support of trusted traveller programs, we have also allocated $14 million to the NEXUS program for low-risk frequent travellers. This money will nearly double the program subscription rate from 130,000 to 350,000, helping to alleviate pressure at our land border crossings. A further $6 million was allocated to help develop provincial enhanced drivers' licences, or EDLs. Several provincial EDL programs have been or are being introduced in the coming year.

Steps like these will help us to make our border with the U.S. even more peaceful and more secure.

Canadians can also be proud of the level of cooperation that exists between the two countries in terms of border management. Our border with the United States is one of the world's most secure and peaceful borders.

This is because of the unparalleled spirit of co-operation that exists among our law enforcement, our intelligence, border and immigration agencies.

At the same time, we know further investments in technology and infrastructure are required, above and beyond what I have already outlined. For example, it is a priority of our government to complete a new crossing at Detroit/Windsor. This is an enormously important border crossing for Canada, and that is why the construction of the Detroit/Windsor international river crossing, DRIC bridge, is so important. Construction of the bridge is part of a $300 million commitment to improving infrastructure in the Windsor gateway. It will go a long way toward addressing traffic congestion, as well as security issues.

This is part of our work with the Government of Ontario through our “Let's Get Windsor-Essex Moving” strategy.

Furthermore, we are joining forces with the United States, the government of the State of Michigan and that of the Province of Ontario to thoroughly study the region's transport system, including roads, water crossings and inspection points.

Through the Detroit River international crossing project, we are aiming to have additional crossing capacity in place by 2013. Through these and other initiatives, we will continue to work with our partners in the U.S. to support North American global competitiveness and the rapid and efficient expansion of North America's busiest commercial crossing.

To keep our trade flowing, the Canada Border Services Agency is also delivering a variety of important programs. This includes the eManifest importer admissibility data, or IAD, initiative, which will be implemented by 2012. It also includes the free and secure trade, FAST, initiative, the partners in protection, or PIP, program, the customs self-assessment program, CSA, initiative, the commercial driver registration program, CDRP, and the advance commercial information, or ACI, program.

All these programs are aimed at streamlining border crossing processes for exporters and shippers and keeping our trade flowing smoothly and securely across our borders.

Lastly, we will pursue our efforts to prepare for the implementation of the western hemisphere travel initiative at both land and sea ports of entry beginning in June 2009.

Once implemented, cross-border travellers will be required to present a passport or an alternative document, such as an enhanced driver's licence or a trusted traveller card, when entering the United States.

From the very beginning, this government has worked to ensure that the implementation of the U.S. policy will have minimal impact on the cross-border movement of Canadian goods and Canadian travellers. Working with our partners in the U.S., we successfully rolled back the introduction of WHTI by 18 months. Our 22 missions in the United States, especially our embassy in Washington, were very active in this effort. They continue to play a crucial in communicating the requirements of the WHTI to Canadian citizens living in the United States and working with the U.S. government on joint communications in both countries.

This government believes that any new border-crossing measures, including the western hemisphere travel initiative, with its passport rules for all travel to the U.S., should be implemented in a way that reflects the importance of the border to our societies and economies. Our border should continue drawing people and businesses together, not keep them apart.

This government recognizes the importance of keeping our trade, our people and our investment dollars flowing smoothly, efficiently and effectively through our borders throughout the North American space and around the world.

In conclusion, we will continue to work to that end and with a view to ensuring that North America is better equipped to face competition in the future.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Liberal

Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have heard myths from the government side about the very good relations it has had with our partner to the south, the United States government, and that it was cozy with the Bush administration. If the Conservatives were so cozy, why was there so much protectionism under that government?

I will quote something that was said by the current Minister of International Trade when he was the minister of public safety. He said, “We know that Canada is seen as a soft spot...of undesirable people, possibly criminal elements, being able to gain access to our country”.

If the senior ministers in the Conservative government are fearmongering and making Canada look like a porous border, how can Canadians trust the government to take the necessary action to prevent trade sanctions, travelling, et cetera?

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Conservative

Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague might have finished the hon. member's quote.

We might also remember that the party opposite, when it was in government, did more to, apparently, deliberately alienate our neighbour and greatest trading partner than to build some of the bridges, not the least of which will be built across the Windsor crossing in the years ahead. In fact, since 2006 we think that Canadian-American relations have greatly improved.

I know the hon. members opposite love to deal in myths and torquing of the truth, and this includes all governments since 9/11, but Canada has spent more than $10 billion in new security investments to protect Canadians. The reality is that the dialogue between our two countries is better than it has been for years. We are working together. There have been some misunderstandings and some misperceptions but the frank and open relationship that we enjoy with the new administration is proof positive that we are moving forward.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

It being 6:15 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the supply proceedings.

Is the House ready for the question?

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Question.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

All those opposed will please say nay.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Opposition Motion--Canada-United States BorderBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

In my opinion, the nays have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #53

Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

I declare the motion carried.