House of Commons Hansard #64 of the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was environment.

Topics

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

There being no motions at report stage, the House will now proceed, without debate, to the putting of the question on the motion to concur in the bill at report stage.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Gordon O'Connor Conservative Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON

moved that the bill be concurred in.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

On division.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Gordon O'Connor Conservative Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON

(Motion agreed to)

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Gordon O'Connor Conservative Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON

moved that the bill be read the third time and passed.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

South Shore—St. Margaret's Nova Scotia

Conservative

Gerald Keddy ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to speak to Bill C-24, the Canada-Peru free trade agreement.

As members know, our Conservative government's global commerce strategy includes a re-energized agenda of trade liberalization with our partners around the world. It will be this strategy that will help to lead Canada out of this recession that is affecting every country in the world today.

As a trading nation, Canadian companies, Canadian producers and Canadian investors need access to international markets to stay competitive. We have entered an age of fierce global competition, as emerging economies continue climbing the value chain and establishing themselves in an ever-widening range of sectors.

In this time of economic uncertainty, with a slowdown in the U.S. economy, our top commercial partner, and ongoing turbulence in international financial markets, Canadian exporters and investors will continue to be affected.

We have done a good job of riding out the storm, thanks largely to Canada's strengths, like low unemployment, the strongest fiscal situation in the G7, a sound borrowing system and our endowment of natural resources that continue to be in demand the world over.

However, it is extremely clear that we must remain vigilant. Our Conservative government must continue to fight protectionist measures around the world and continue taking steps to ensure Canadian companies remain competitive, maintain their markets and have access to new opportunities.

The Prime Minister and the Minister of International Trade understand the challenge. The Prime Minister has committed to playing an active role in the Americas and to building strategic relationships with key partners in our neighbourhood.

Peru is a leader in Latin America, a lynchpin in the political and economic stability of the region. It has been an economic engine with a GDP growth rate of 9.8% in 2008, the top of Latin American countries and higher than that experienced by China or India.

Peru also has a solid outward orientation. A leader in trade liberalization, Peru is currently pursuing trade negotiations with a number of countries.

As it stands, Canadian exporters are at an immediate risk of losing markets in Peru due to the entry into force of a trade promotion agreement with the United States on February 1 of this year.

Peru has also recently completed trade negotiations with China and EFTA and is negotiating with the EU, South Korea, Mexico and Thailand.

As members can see, Peru has a very robust international trade agenda. It is an economic engine in the Americas. It is beneficial to Peru and beneficial to Canada that we see this free trade agreement go forward.

Our firms and Canadian workers deserve trade agreements that address this situation and allow them to compete in international markets on a level playing field. We need partners like Peru, especially as we move forward on engaging with like-minded countries throughout the Americas.

Canadians will benefit. Peru is already an established and growing market for our businesses. In 2008, two-way merchandise trade between our countries totalled $2.8 billion.

With this new agreement, our nations are taking a critical step to intensify our commercial relationship in the years ahead and to create new opportunities for citizens in both countries to prosper.

Upon its implementation, Peru will eliminate tariffs on nearly all current Canadian exports, including wheat, pulses and mining equipment.

It should be noted that some opposition parties have been holding up a number of these free trade agreements. At the same time, they propose that they continue to support Canadian business and Canadian opportunity, especially Canadian exports because we are an exporting nation.

In wheat and barley alone, in two free trade agreements between Colombia and Peru, roughly $250 million of Canadian trade is at risk because these agreements have not passed through the House yet.

Perhaps the members who are intent on holding up these agreements and at the same time are saying that they support Canadian industry, should take a look at this one industry alone where a quarter of a billion dollars are at risk because of opposition shenanigans, quite frankly, in holding them up.

Upon its implementation, Peru will eliminate tariffs on nearly all Canadian exports, including wheat, pulses and mining equipment. Again, that is worth repeating. A variety of paper products, machinery and equipment will also enjoy the same benefit.

The Canada-Peru free trade agreement also provides a great opportunity to take our current trade in services to a new level in the years ahead. In 2006, the most recent year where statistics are available, Canada exported $33 million worth of commercial services to Peru. This new agreement provides a wonderful opportunity to grow this number in the years ahead and continue boosting the level of cross-border trade enjoyed by our two countries.

Canadian investors, too, have a significant presence in the Peruvian market. Even before this agreement, our countries made a firm commitment to enhancing two-way investments through a joint foreign investment promotion and protection agreement, or FIPPA, which entered into force in 2007. Canada is one of Peru's largest overall foreign investors, with an estimated $2.35 billion worth of investment stock in Peru in 2008, led by the mining and the financial sectors.

This FTA builds on the existing FIPPA and gains new ground for Canadian investors. Specifically, it includes strong obligations that will, first, ensure the free transfer of capital related to investments, protect against unlawful expropriation and provide for non-discriminatory treatment of Canadian investors. In short, we have levelled the playing field.

It also provides for an effective, binding and impartial dispute settlement mechanism. In other words, the agreement provides the security, stability and predictability that investors need. Our government procurement agreement guarantees Canadian suppliers the right to bid on a broad range of goods, services and construction contracts carried out by Peru's federal government entities.

It is no wonder that Canadian businesses in a number of sectors have been strong advocates of this agreement. Their support has been crucial throughout the negotiating process that began in June 2007. The result is something we can all be proud of. With this new agreement, our nations are taking a critical step to intensify our commercial relationships in the years ahead and to create new opportunities for citizens in both countries to prosper.

We have negotiated a high quality and comprehensive free trade agreement, covering everything from market access to goods to cross-border trade and services, to investment and government procurement. Canadian exporter service providers and investors will benefit, and the agreement will create new opportunities for Canadian businesses and producers in the Peruvian market.

However, an effective should do more than eliminate tariffs. It should also tackle the non-tariff barriers that keep a trade relationship from reaching its full potential. With this agreement, that is just what we have done, by including new measures to ensure greater transparency, including better predictability of incoming regulations, and the right by industry to be consulted at an early stage in the development of regulations, promoting the use of international standards and creating a mechanism to promptly address problems.

We are taking action on a number of fronts to unlock the trade potential inherent in the Canada-Peru relationship but this agreement is significant for other reasons as well. This agreement is also accompanied by important side agreements that demonstrate our joint commitment to corporate social responsibility, the rights of workers and preserving the natural environment.

Many Canadian companies and the Canadian government are at the forefront of efforts to ensure accountability and transparency through renewed commitments to principles of good corporate citizenship, both domestically and internationally.

The Canadian government encourages and expects Canadian companies operating abroad to respect all applicable laws and international standards and to conduct their activities in a socially and environmentally responsible manner, recognizing that responsible business conduct reinforces the positive effect that trade and investment can have on labour rights, the environment and competitiveness.

This complements the Conservative government's recently announced corporate social responsibility strategy that will increase the competitiveness of the Canadian extractive sector operating abroad by enhancing its ability to manage social and environmental risk. Our nations recognize that prosperity must not come at the expense of the environment and workers' rights.

This agreement paves the way for significant dialogue in other areas of mutual interest, including poverty reduction and trade related co-operation. We share a belief with Peru that open markets and international trade are the best hope for fostering development of our common security in the hemisphere. In fact, this approach builds on our successful experience with free trade partners, such as the United States, Mexico, Chile and Costa Rica.

We recognize that prosperity cannot take hold without security or in the absence of freedom and the rule of law brought about through the pursuit of democratic governance. A good, healthy democracy cannot function without a sound underpinning of personal security and the chance to improve living standards through increased trade and investment. That is why our Conservative government is committed to working closely with partners like Peru to influence positive change throughout the region and promote the principles of sound governance, security and prosperity.

Taken together, these agreements mark a new chapter in the Canada-Peru relationship, one that will forge an even stronger bond between our nations in the years ahead. They also mark yet another milestone in Canada's trade policy. In this day of fierce global competition and overall economic uncertainty, I am proud to say that we are taking the measures necessary to continue creating a resilient and competitive Canadian economy in the years ahead.

We need to move expeditiously to help our businesses grow. As I noted, the United States already has preferred access to Peru's markets for their exports and government procurement. Canadian companies deserve to compete on a level playing field. I ask for the support of all hon. members of this place as we continue these efforts and create new opportunities for all Canadians to thrive and prosper in the global economy.

In closing, I would say that since coming to government, in 2006, we have pursued a very ambitious free trade agreement, especially in the Americas. There is a tremendous amount of Canadian direct investment abroad in the Americas. Quite frankly, this is our neighbourhood. This is the continent that Canada is part of: North America and South America. It only makes sense that we have closer ties.

Unfortunately, that was not seen as a priority by the previous government, so we have a lot of ground to make up. We have a huge opportunity. There are a number of countries throughout Central America, the Caribbean and South America that are looking to enhance ties with Canada and improve the situation they find their own countries in.

These are growing economies with some challenges, and we recognize that. For us to turn our backs on these critical relationships at this time would not be good foreign policy, it would not be good trade policy and it would indicate that we do not have a clear understanding of what is going on in Central America and South America.

The opportunity is huge and the benefits are great. The benefits are great, not just for Canada but for our partners in Central America, South America and the Caribbean. Again, I would implore all my colleagues in the House to support this agreement. It is a good agreement, one that will help carry Canada into the future and ensure and protect Canadian and Peruvian jobs and opportunities.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to hear in the parliamentary secretary's comments a renewed commitment to corporate social responsibility. I think that is welcome news.

I wonder whether the parliamentary secretary is aware that there was a parliamentary report by the foreign affairs committee in 2005 that was followed up by round tables in 2007 to which his government did not respond. The round table's report was retabled in 2009, to which his government did not respond. It was then followed by my private member's bill, Bill C-300. Only lately has the government got religion, in March of this year, with a proposal that has the appearance of doing something but in fact is doing very little and may actually be counterproductive.

Some of the initiatives in that press release are actually good, and I encourage the government to pursue those. However, the ones that are most objectionable are the ones having to do with the actual investigative power of the councillor.

Would the hon. parliament secretary commit to incorporating the CSR obligations or responsibilities in the press release and the mandate of the new councillor into Bill C-300 as this bill goes forward?

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that the hon. member supports the government initiatives in corporate social responsibility. We certainly have come further and more quickly than any government in the history of this country.

Unfortunately, the member has convinced a number of his colleagues that the way his bill is written would benefit corporate social responsibility and enhance it, and nothing is further from the truth.

There is the whole issue when we are looking at corporate social responsibility of extraterritoriality and the ability for Canadians to enforce our laws in foreign jurisdictions. That is simply not appropriate and it is not applicable.

The other assumption that the hon. member's bill makes is that all the NGOs' statements and the negative statements and every press release the member reads about Canada's mining sector, our extractive sector, which is the biggest extractive sector in the world by far, operating in over 100 countries, are true.

I visited a mine in Honduras that the NGO said was not practising good social responsibility and found out from being on the ground there, in a little town called San Andrés, which used to have 1,200 people and now has about 30,000 people because they have come there for jobs and opportunity and to work in the mine, a community that had no doctor, no facilities at all--one could go to the priest after one was dead--now has a hospital that is operated by the mining company there.

We had a former member of Parliament, Alexa McDonough, who never visited the town, never visited the mine, but put a report out condemning them for corporate social responsibility. In fact when one actually visits the place, it was untrue. I cannot put it any clearer than that.

I am extremely aware of corporate social responsibility. We have appointed a councillor for corporate social responsibility. We will put an office in place, probably in Montreal, for corporate social responsibility, where the NGOs and industry alike can meet and find out information about Canadian mining operations abroad.

We will continue to work with all members of the House in a proactive way to ensure and support corporate social responsibility. But let us be clear: the whole issue of extraterritoriality has to be addressed.

One of the members in this member's own party said very clearly that although well intended it was unfortunate that the bill was brought forward because it is misguided.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to what my hon. colleague was saying. I do represent probably one of the largest mining regions in the world, and the issue of holding to account is certainly an issue.

In terms of the very rosy picture he is painting, my concern with the deal with Peru is that labour rights are not in the agreement; that is in a side agreement. Peru has a notorious record in terms of labour rights. I would hope he would at least admit that.

In terms of environmental protection, it is all well and good to say we are going to set up some office in Montreal, but the agreement should clearly spell it out, and not in a side agreement, the commitments, obligations and triggers that will be invoked if there are issues.

Once again, in terms of the rights of the investors we see the kind of chapter 11 provisions that existed under NAFTA. Any corporate operation is able to take action, and yet labour groups and environmental groups are not. Why is it that we see a very clear protection of corporate interest in this agreement without the clear commitments to labour and environment?

If we had those clear commitments, I think the member would find a lot more interest in working with the development in Peru and making sure that our export economy works. However, when we see them shunted off to side agreements it is very hard for us in the House to take the government seriously when it comes to its Pollyannaish claims about respecting labour and respecting the environment.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS

Pollyannaish is an interesting turn of a phrase.

Mr. Speaker, the reality is, regardless of how the hon. member would want to mislead the public and this House, for the member for Timmins—James Bay the reality is that on labour rights—

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I would ask for a bit of common respect in this House. For him to say that I am trying to mislead the House is to call me a liar on this. I am asking what is in the provisions of the document. He can disagree with me, but I would ask him to retract that comment.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

The Chair has generally ruled that the word “mislead” is not the same as suggested by the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay; the words “deliberately misleading” are out of order. He did not suggest that the hon. member deliberately misled the House at all, and if he had, he would have been asked to retract such a statement.

I do not think that anything the parliamentary secretary has said up until now has been out of order. He can respond as he will to the submission by the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay on this point.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS

Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the comment that I have not been out of order up to now. I hope by the time I finish my statements today, I will not be out of order either.

Quite frankly, the labour rights and environmental side agreements to this agreement are the strongest we have ever signed. This is a trade agreement. This agreement is really not meant to cover labour and the environment, but we have expanded our trade agreements. We accept the fact that labour and environmental rights are a part of a new era of corporate social responsibility and a new era in trade agreements, especially with countries where their labour and environmental processes may not be as advanced as ours. These are very solid protections for labour and the environment.

I find it interesting. The opposition members say that we have signed a separate agreement on labour and a separate agreement on the environment, which have strength of their own. However, had we put them in the main agreement, they would have said that they meant nothing because they were only one line. Yet they have a force of their own, separate of trade. Because we have done that, however, those members say they are just an addition and they do not mean anything. No matter how we did it, NDP members would not be satisfied. Therefore, I am not going to pretend to satisfy them.

However, I will explain to them, one more time, that these are the strongest additions and protections for labour and environmental processes of any agreement ever signed in the history of Canada.

We have already looked at the rights for the environment and labour. When we look at the rights for investors, they need to have some protections. Let us be clear. What we have is a rules-based process to settle disputes. That is much better than gunboat diplomacy, which apparently those members would like to see us apply. I do not agree with that.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-24, the Canada-Peru free trade agreement implementation act. The bill seeks to implement the free trade agreement, the agreement on labour co-operation and the agreement on the environment entered into by Canada with the Republic of Peru on May 29, 2008.

The bill is extremely important to Canada's agriculture sector. While the agreement has potential for many of our farm products, it is critical to our wheat and durum industries, to our pulse and specialty crop industries, to beef and to pork and to potatoes. We know about the tremendous potatoes that come from the province of Prince Edward Island. I can see my colleague from Manitoba is jealous of the kind of potatoes we produce in Prince Edward Island, and I understand why.

Before I get into all the reasons why this is so important to farmers, there is a point I would like to raise on corporate social responsibility.

My colleague from Scarborough—Guildwood earlier raised the point. Peru is cited in the strategy of the Government of Canada on corporate social responsibility for the Canadian international extractive sector. Peru is also cited as a country where the Canadian International Development Agency has worked extensively with the government, mining companies and affected communities to develop and promote regulatory requirements for social and environmental management.

The Canada-Peru FTA also includes corporate social responsibility provisions encouraging the promotion of principles and of responsible business, and that is an important point to make. We feel very strongly about corporate social responsibility and we have some very grave concerns about the trade agreement with Colombia. However, on this side of the House, we believe Peru is doing much better.

On the human rights side, it is clear that some human rights issues remain in Peru. In its 2008 report, Amnesty International recognized that important steps had been taken to bring to justice those responsible for human rights violations during the years of armed conflict between 1980 and 2000. In terms of violent crime in Peru, the country's homicide rate now stands at 5.7 per hundred thousand, which is still too high, but it is among the lowest in South America. Those are some steps forward.

I know there will be some who will say that human rights are still a concern and we understand that. However, when the agreement is settled with Peru, I would encourage the Government of Canada to continue its emphasis in discussions about good human rights standards to ensure that CIDA does its part in Peru as well.

I believe we can do both. We can improve trade to the benefit of both countries, the citizens of Canada and the citizens of Peru. We can also improve human rights in the Republic of Peru for the benefit of Peru and certainly the globe.

I might mention as well that there are side agreements on labour co-operation and the environment, and that is important. I will agree with my NDP colleague, however, that it would better if they were encompassed in the agreement as a whole rather than being in side agreements, but it is a step forward. More and more we see the United States negotiating agreements that include the environment and labour as part of those agreements.

If environment and labour are not part of those agreements, we are allowing people and industries in other countries to abuse the environment. We give them a competitive advantage. We allow them to undermine labour standards and give their countries and those industries a labour, wage or benefit advantage. That is not what we want to see happen. We have to bring up the standard globally and that is what we must work toward.

There is certainly economic risk if we do not ratify this agreement, especially as it relates to the agriculture sector. Since 2005, Peru has concluded free trade agreements with the United States, Chile, Thailand, Singapore and the Mercosur region, which is Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. The United States Congress has ratified the U.S.-Peru free trade agreement. In fact, that just entered into force on February 1 of this year.

If Canada fails to implement a Canada-Peru free trade agreement, Canadian businesses will be at an economic disadvantage compared to their foreign competitors. One stark example of this concern is the export of wheat. We produce wheat in abundance in our country. We have one of the greatest selling agencies in the world, the Canadian Wheat Board, which the government hates to admit.

The wheat exports of the United States have recently benefited from the U.S.-Peru free trade agreement, immediately receiving duty-free treatment. Without a free trade agreement, Canada's exports of wheat, which comprise 38% of Canada's total exports to Peru, will continue to face a 17% tariff. This would place Canadian wheat at a very substantial disadvantage. We cannot allow those negative consequences to happen by opposing this agreement.

Let me turn to why the agreement is so important for Canadian farmers. Perhaps the best way for me to do that is to turn to the presentations that farm leaders have presented to either government or parliamentary committees.

I will turn first to a letter by Larry Hill. He is the president of the Canadian Wheat Board. In his letter to the chair of the Standing Committee on International Trade, he said:

It's important that the legislation is passed in a timely manner so as to avoid western Canadian farmers being placed at a disadvantage into this important Latin American market.

Wheat and durum are Canada's number one export to Peru. Under the agreement, Canadian wheat, durum and barley will receive tariff-free access upon implementation. While there is currently no tariff, applied tariffs have historically averaged 15%. The tariff was temporarily removed during last year's high price period, but is likely to be reinstated now that prices are declining.

Mr. Hill went on to say:

Peru is a key, fast-growing Latin American market for western Canadian farmers. CWB exports to Peru average 410,000 tonnes of wheat and 18,400 tonnes of barley annually. In 2008, Canadian sales were worth $134 million Cdn for wheat and barley farmers.

In February 2009, the U.S. and Peru implemented a Trade Promotion Agreement, resulting in guaranteed tariff-free access for American wheat and barley into Peru. Without a similar agreement, Canadian wheat and barley will be placed at a real commercial disadvantage, likely resulting in lost sales. It is imperative that the Canadian agreement be implemented prior to Peru reinstating its tariffs.

In that letter, Mr. Hill mentions how important the market is and the amount of wheat that we export into that country.

I was in Ecuador a number of years ago and spoke with the president of Bonita Bananas. Ecuador is a big importer of Canadian hard red spring wheat mainly. He told me that Ecuador imported somewhere around $72 million of Canadian wheat on average each year.

The United States signed an agreement with Ecuador and to a great extent we have been displaced from that market. We cannot afford to lose that market. Our most important market, as we consistently tell the government, is the market that we have. We have to maintain that market.

There are concerns from some agricultural producers that Canada was unable to secure the same favourable conditions in tariff reductions as the United States, particularly in beef and pork products. Still, even Canadian beef and pork producers want us to ratify the Canada-Peru FTA as they believe that imperfect tariff reductions are better than no tariff reductions at all.

Even with these concerns, the president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture spelled out the concerns and benefits. He did that best when he was before the Standing Committee on International Trade on May 7. I would like to quote a few of his remarks, because he sums it up certainly better than I could in my words. Laurent Pellerin, the president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, said:

--I would like to say that this agreement should be implemented as quickly as possible. It is not a huge achievement with regard to the objectives of agricultural producers, but some improvements are worth implementing.

We are negotiating this agreement more or less at the same time as the United States, or a bit later. We believe, however, that we must negotiate parity with the United States in future negotiations or free trade agreements and contracts with countries like Peru. Unfortunately, in the case of Peru, Canada is far from achieving the same thing as the United States. We recognize that the Peruvian market is probably more significant for the United States than it is for Canada, but all the same, parity would have been a very desirable goal.

It is too bad that the American negotiators perhaps negotiated a little tougher than our negotiators. In any event, it is a step forward. He went on to say:

In the case of Peru, the United States will have shorter tariff elimination periods, and in some cases, tariff-free access, and in others higher quotas. Even if Canada negotiated something better than our current conditions, because the Americans negotiated tariff reductions and completely free access before us, the market or business will favour American products over ours. This is something we must bear in mind.

He went on to talk about the beef industry. Again I will quote his remarks because he is the representative of the industry and his words bear merit. He talked about how important the Peruvian market is for beef and pork, but that again, the Americans have a substantial advantage. He said:

A great deal of fresh, chilled and frozen beef offal is traded between Canada and Peru. In this sector, the tariffs will be eliminated simultaneously for both Canada and the United States, but it should be noted that the quota or volume exported by the United States is twice as large as Canada's. So once again, the agreement will favour the U.S. market.

In the long term, both Canada and the United States will achieve duty-free access for pork carcasses and cuts. However, in the short and medium term, the agreement is definitely more favourable for the Americans and could seriously affect the products from Canada because there again, the tariffs on U.S. pork will be eliminated by the beginning of the 5th year, whereas for Canada they will not be eliminated until the 17th year.

He went on to state:

Still in the pork sector, the quota for cuts in the offal category, including pig fat and bellies, will start at 325 tonnes per year and increase to 504 tonnes in year 10. Once again, these are not large quantities. However, the Canadian Pork Council has told us that this agreement must be supported, since a deal with slightly increasing quotas is better than no deal at all with a risk of retaliation. They agree with these measures.

In other words, the Canadian Pork Council agrees.

Mr. Pellerin went on to say, “Canada is extremely present on the potato market as well”, an area that I am certainly most familiar with. He said, “Duty-free access strongly favours the United States over Canada, particularly during the first nine years”. I must remind my friend from Manitoba again that when I am talking about potatoes, Prince Edward Island still remains the biggest potato producer. That small province remains the biggest potato producer in this country. This is very important to us in Prince Edward Island.

Mr. Pellerin went on to say:

Tariffs on fresh and chilled potatoes, other than seed, will be eliminated immediately for the United States. As for tariffs on Canadian potatoes, they are subject to a gradual reduction and will be eliminated as of year 10. There again, our small Peruvian market may be replaced by American products, which will be more competitive because they will have duty-free access.

My point is this. Yes, the agreement is important but even with this trade agreement that the Canadian government has negotiated with Peru and the implementation act that we are talking about in the House, the Americans, it is sad to say, still have advantages in that market. Yes, it is a step forward, but it is not as big a step as we would certainly like to see.

The last point raised by Mr. Pellerin concerned frozen potatoes. He said, “I don't need to name the large Canadian companies in this sector, because you already know them”. They would be McCain, Cavendish, et cetera. He said:

Canada is very active on this market as well, and Canadian potato farmers count on this market, especially the frozen french fry market. If the agreement is signed, tariffs on frozen potatoes from the United States will be eliminated immediately, whereas the tariffs on Canadian potatoes will be eliminated gradually, reaching zero in year 10 of the agreement. This market could potentially be attractive for Canada, but you will understand that over the next 10 years, the United States will have a major competitive advantage in the potato sector, and so this is not a major gain for Canada.

All that to say, yes, certainly the agreement is important. It is very important especially to the agricultural industry in Canada, wheat and durum, beef and pork, pulse and specialty crops and certainly potatoes. But even with the agreement the Canadian government has failed to negotiate the same advantages as the Americans have negotiated. That is a sad commentary.

The Canada-Peru free trade agreement is certainly supported by a lot of the agricultural industries, and I mentioned the Canadian Wheat Board, pulse growers, et cetera. It is also supported by quite a number of business groups, such as the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and resource organizations such as the Mining Association of Canada.

A reduction in Peru's tariffs could certainly contribute toward increasing the competitiveness of Canadian exports, whether they are industrial goods or agricultural goods.

Therefore, the Canada-Peru free trade agreement is a step forward. As I said in the beginning, in corporate social responsibility, the safeguards are there. The labour and human rights issues are improving. For those reasons the bill is an important bill and I welcome it in the House.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:50 a.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake, MB

Mr. Speaker, in his intervention, the member for Malpeque talked about how important this agreement is for our agriculture industry.

The Minister of International Trade and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, with the support of their parliamentary secretaries, have put a lot of work into developing these trade agreements which are critically important to agriculture across Canada.

As chair of the Canadian section of the Interparliamentary Forum of the Americas, I follow quite closely how important the Americas are to the relationship with Canada, whether that is from a standpoint of commerce and trade, or on the other side, when I wear my other cap, from an environmental standpoint and social responsibility, and as more and more American states want to have a closer relationship, from a democratic standpoint, with Canada.

Recently I met with the Ambassador of Peru. We talked about the many values that we share and that are mutually respected in both our countries, such as democracy, the rule of law and the free market.

The member for Malpeque talked about all the organizations that have come out quite strongly in favour of this free trade agreement with Peru and want us in the House of Commons and the Senate to deal with it in a rather rapid fashion. Despite some of the concerns that the member has laid out, and I take those at face value, that our American competitors may still have some advantages, the member did say that this is a major step forward. It is a step that we need to take if we are to continue to level the playing field between Canada and our other international competitors. We have to have access to markets. We have to have a mechanism to reduce tariffs, especially if they are over quota in those particular marketplaces.

He mentioned that the Grain Growers of Canada favour this. The Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance are on side. The real voice of the cattle industry, the Canadian Cattlemen's Association and the Canadian Pork Council want to see this brought into place as quickly as possible. As well, the Canadian Wheat Board, which he mentioned, wants us to move forward.

In my province of Manitoba we grow a great deal of potatoes. It is one of the largest potato-producing provinces in Canada, and produces, in my opinion, the best potatoes in the country.

The pulse growers in Manitoba and across Canada need to have access to these Latin American markets. When we start talking about the sales of beans and peas and pulses, the Latin American market is the number one marketplace for those growers and we have to make sure that we have the opportunity to export.

I am glad the member mentioned the importance of agriculture. I am hoping that he will come back and say that the Liberals are in support of the agreement and that we will be moving forward on it as quickly as possible.

I would also like him to comment on why we were not seeing any of these agreements brought into play over the 13 years when he sat on the government side and functioned as a parliamentary secretary to the minister of agriculture.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Selkirk—Interlake for his remarks. In fact, I agree with most of what he said, but certainly not all. If he is growing good potatoes in Manitoba, they must be from Prince Edward Island seed. We know that.

I cannot emphasize enough, as I said in my remarks and as the member for Selkirk—Interlake said in his, that it is critical that this agreement be implemented quickly. I personally see this agreement being quite substantially different from the Canada-Colombia agreement, mainly on the human rights side. There have been tremendous gains in human rights and corporate social responsibility in Peru that we do not see on the Colombia side of the agreement, and we ought to be very concerned about that in this House.

The member asked why these agreements were not signed when the Liberals were in government, the party that balanced the books, had 10 surpluses. In two short years the Conservative government has driven the country into the biggest deficit in Canadian history. That is the sad part of the Conservative government, that in two short years it has basically driven this country away from its tremendous potential with well balanced books and the moneys that were put into research and development for the Canadian people. Now, that has all been squandered away. What we see is the red ink into the future on account of Conservative mismanagement and incompetence in terms of the economy. I had to mention that.

However, in terms of the trade agreements themselves, all that is really happening here, finally, and it differs from how the Conservatives have taken our fiscal position that we left them in and drove it into the ground and put the country into debt into the future, is that they are building on the good work that the Liberal government has done on these trade agreements.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, I like the hon. member, but I do question the Liberal's logic of rubber-stamping everything the Conservatives bring forward on trade.

We had the disastrous softwood lumber sellout that the Liberals helped push through Parliament. It cost tens of thousands of jobs, plus over $1 billion in fines that are coming. Canadian taxpayers are going to have to cover these fines because of the irresponsibility of the government. We had the shipbuilding sellout that the Liberals rubber-stamped, as well, even though hundreds of shipyard workers from Liberal-held ridings were writing to Parliament saying, “Don't pass this agreement”.

Now, we have this egregious agreement with murderous paramilitary thugs and drug lords in Colombia, and the Canada-Peru agreement that the hon. member admits even people are writing in saying it is an inferior agreement to what the U.S. signed with Peru.

This blanket rubber-stamping of everything the Conservative government brings forward on trade, I simply do not understand because it is in not in Canada's interest. Canadians are losing jobs because of these ill-favoured and irresponsible agreements.

Why do the Liberals rubber-stamp everything the Conservatives bring forward?

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

Mr. Speaker, I will answer the questions from the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley directly in a moment.

First, however, I must point out that the biggest rubber-stamp in Canada for why we have this man as Prime Minister and that party on the government side is the leader of the NDP. He is the man. At the time when we had early learning and child care, he ended up supporting the Conservatives when we were in opposition, so we lost that agreement on early learning and child care.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

An hon. member

You lost the election.

Canada-Peru Free Trade AgreementGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

Of course we lost the election, we know that. But it was his party's support for agreements that were already in place that has given the Prime Minister the opportunity to drive this country into debt as he has and undermined the early learning and child care agreements.

Now to his question, the fact of the matter is we are a global trader, we are an exporting nation, and we have to move forward with trade agreements. This is a step in the right direction. It is especially important to the agriculture industry and we need to give the agriculture industry opportunities as well.

International Children's FestivalStatements By Members

11 a.m.

Conservative

Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB

Mr. Speaker, this past Tuesday saw the kick-off of the 28th annual St. Albert International Children's Festival. This festival will entertain over 50,000 children over its five day duration.

There are many different events featuring a host of international artists coming from Scotland, the Netherlands, U.S.A., Mexico, Cuba, New Zealand, and of course Canadian artists. These artists will amaze and delight children young and old with their performances.

I would also like to thank the Canadian Armed Forces for the construction of a temporary foot bridge to provide children with access to the stages on the opposite side of the Sturgeon River.

Many people in my constituency have worked extremely hard to pull this festival together. Not least of which I would like to thank the hon. Minister of Canadian Heritage, and I also extend my thanks to the hon. Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities for his assistance with the temporary foot bridge, as well as the tireless work done by St. Albert Mayor, His Worship Nolan Crouse and his staff, and of course the Canadian Armed Forces for the rapid construction.

I am confident that all who attend will have a wonderful experience at this annual St. Albert International Children's Festival.

Roots and ShootsStatements By Members

11 a.m.

Liberal

Keith Martin Liberal Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC

Mr. Speaker, in 1991 Dr. Jane Goodall, the world famous primatologist and humanitarian, created the Roots and Shoots program for children. Today more than 100,000 children participate in it in over 50 countries. The program encourages children to get active and create projects that benefit their environment.

Last month we announced, with Dr. Goodall and National Chief Phil Fontaine, a partnership that will see Roots and Shoots programs in first nations communities. First nations from Beecher Bay and Sooke on Vancouver Island in my riding are the first to participate and further interest has been expressed by communities from Yukon to the Maritimes.

This initiative will get children engaged in their environment, link children up across cultural, geographic and linguistic divides, build their self-confidence, and reduce an array of social problems.

I would like to thank Dr. Goodall, National Chief Phil Fontaine, and especially Gina Cosentino from the AFN and Jane Lawton and Barbara Cartwright from the JGI for their ceaseless efforts to make this happen.

I invite communities across our country to look at the Roots and Shoots program and participate in this program for our children and for our environment.

Roger MironStatements By Members

11 a.m.

Bloc

Nicolas Dufour Bloc Repentigny, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to one of Quebec's country music legends, Roger Miron, who is celebrating his 80th birthday this week.

Mr. Miron developed a love for the guitar at a young age. He started his career in country western singing in 1950. Two years later, he started his own band, which he sang with across Quebec, Canada, the United States, and even France. 1956 marked the release of one of his most well-known songs, À qui l'p'tit coeur après neuf heures.

In celebration of the famous Troubadour Tyrolien, some thirty well-known artists are participating in a show at the Centre Léo-Chaussé in Saint-Sulpice. Fans from across Quebec, New Brunswick and Ontario will be there to pay tribute to him. Not only is Mr. Miron a multi-talented performer, but he has also opened the door to country music for a number of musicians.

As member of Parliament for Repentigny, I would like to congratulate Mr. Miron on his career, and I salute his dedication to promoting country music in Quebec.