Debates of Sept. 29th, 2009

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is always amusing to hear the Liberals talk about trade liberalization and trade because their positions really change quite rapidly.

I think of the Liberals when they were in opposition prior to the election of Prime Minister Chrétien. They were rabid anti-free traders and in office they advocated for trade.

Therefore, it is tough to take seriously anything they say today whether they are for it or against it because they tend to change their minds once elected on trade liberalization.

It is always interesting to hear the comments, but I recognize they may not have any bearing on what would happen if they were ever unfortunately to return to office.

In terms of the Canada-Colombia free trade bill, I think it is important to reference that in February 2008 a report from the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation in Colombia stated:

It must be recognized that Colombia has made progress in restoring security throughout the country in recent years, and the visibility given to human rights in the public agenda is a solid achievement.

Hopefully, Canada like other countries has helped raised that--

[The Acting Speaker, NDP, Denise Savoie]

Order. Question and comments, the hon. member for Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Madam Speaker, I certainly was a little confused for a minute. I thought perhaps the member had the wrong notes in front of him because he talked more about stimulus than with regard to Bill C-23. The Canada-Colombia free trade agreement is of great concern to not only the NDP but as well to many people within Canada and abroad.

The Canada-Colombia agreement is strongly opposed by parliamentarians in Canada and Colombia, by civil society groups, indigenous people, trade unions, environmental groups and citizens from both nations.

There was a letter that was sent by over 50 prominent Canadians including activists, professors, labour groups, civil society, Stephen Lewis, Ed Broadbent and Naomi Klein to the Leader of the Liberal Party, Michael Ignatieff, during the party's leadership convention--

[The Acting Speaker, NDP, Denise Savoie]

Order, please. I would ask the hon. member to refrain mentioning the name of a sitting member of Parliament, but in any event I must give the member for Barrie the time to respond to that question.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Madam Speaker, in terms of her question about the topic, sometimes the NDP members forget to appreciate this. We have to look at prosperity in all its elements. Certainly, I can appreciate why they may not view it that way but job creation is certainly related to trade liberalization as it is to infrastructure projects. We have to look at the larger picture of how to create jobs, not just criticize or debate in Parliament. It is important to look at tangible job creation mechanisms.

Trade liberalization is one of them, infrastructure investments are another. They are all linked to the larger picture of prosperity.

In terms of Colombia, Colombia will make no progress if we isolate that country. We believe that political engagement, development assistance and free trade are all key elements for success in Colombia.

Over the last six years the personal situation of a vast majority of Colombians has improved. Illegal armed groups have been weakened. The progress has been acknowledged by the global community and international organizations that are present in Colombia.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-23, the Canada–Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act.

I must point out right away that the Bloc will oppose this bill, and not because it opposes free trade or the opening of borders. Everyone knows that, in the past, Quebeckers supported the philosophy that resulted in the establishment of the North American Free Trade Agreement, despite its imperfections. It was interesting to see that, for the first time, a free trade agreement included not only our neighbour the United States, but a developing country, as well, namely Mexico.

At the time, I was the general secretary of the Confédération des syndicats nationaux. We had changed the name of the Coalition Québécoise d'opposition au libre-échange—the Quebec coalition to oppose free trade—at the time the free trade agreement with the United States was being negotiated. With NAFTA, it became the Réseau québécois sur l'intégration continentale—the Quebec continental integration network.

So there is a very broad consensus in Quebec on the importance of opening up borders and doing so under a set of rules benefiting both parties. In our opinion, the free trade agreement between Canada and Colombia in no way serves the interests of Colombia or of Canada or of Quebec.

I point out first that the Bloc, like most stakeholders in international trade, advocates multilateral agreements within the context of the World Trade Organization or as part of an eventual free trade area of the Americas. As there is currently a blockage at the WTO, the former Bush administration in the U.S. had adopted the strategy of trying to sign bilateral agreements with countries unable to properly defend their interests. Free trade agreements have been attempted or have been signed between the United States and Chile, Peru and Colombia.

We note that the Conservative government has adopted this strategy with less success than the previous American administration. It simply blindly followed the Republican strategy, the prerogative of President Bush, negotiating bilateral agreements with powerless countries, through which the Americans imposed their vision of free trade. The Conservative government of Canada has adopted the same strategy.

This strategy, I note, is being questioned by the new American administration, and President Obama has called for a review of the strategy for expanding international trade.

It must be said that negotiations to expand free trade at the WTO and in the context of a free trade area of the Americas are currently blocked, not because people are opposed to opening up borders, but because they realized that opening up borders without another agreement on labour, the environment or culture and language leads to troubled waters, as we have seen with chapter 11 of NAFTA on the protection of investments, which has been reproduced in the free trade agreement with Colombia.

We should be very clear. This agreement is certainly not based on the amount of trade between Canada and Colombia. In 2008, Canadian imports from Colombia amounted to $644 million. We are not even talking a billion dollars here. At the same time, Canadian exports to Colombia amounted to about $700 million. These negotiations certainly do not involve a major trading partner. What is quite significant, though, is the amount of Canadian investment in Colombia, especially the mining sector, which is over a billion dollars.

If we take a look at the chapter on investor protection, we see that it is very prejudicial to governments, especially the Government of Colombia. The amount of Colombian investment in Canada is only a million dollars.

It is obvious that the purpose of the chapter on the protection of foreign investment is not so much to protect Colombian investors in Canada as to protect Canadian investors in Colombia.

Once again, we are not against protecting foreign investment if it is done well. The problem with the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement, as with the free trade agreement with Peru, is that the chapter on protecting foreign investment confers inordinate rights on foreign corporations. These are mostly Canadian corporations operating in Colombia. It is certainly not the Colombian companies operating in Canada that will pose a problem. Canadian companies operating in Colombia are given the ability to sue the Government of Colombia directly in some situations.

We saw this under chapter 11 of NAFTA, which was carefully negotiated although the people involved did not realize what all the ramifications were. We are more aware now of all the abuses that can arise as a result of NAFTA chapter 11, which has been copied in the treaty between Canada and Colombia.

These abuses have to be stopped. We will not support free trade agreements that include chapters to protect foreign investment similar to chapter 11 of NAFTA. That is why we voted against the Canada-Peru free trade agreement and it is one of the reasons why we will vote against this act to implement the free trade agreement between Canada and Colombia.

On the other hand, we recently voted in favour of the free trade agreement with the European Free Trade Association because it did not have any provisions allowing either Scandinavian companies—because the countries in this association are mostly Scandinavian—or Canadian companies to sue the other government.

It is rather strange that the kind of protection provided in these treaties is different as soon as we are dealing with a developing country that cannot bargain from a position of strength. When it comes to a developed country on our own level, the protective agreements are government to government, that is to say, it is Canada that goes before a tribunal like the London tribunal. Unfortunately, a decision was recently handed down that was unfavourable to Canada and its softwood lumber. American companies did not sue Canadian companies or the Government of Canada directly. Instead, it was the American government that filed a complaint with the tribunal and the interests of the Canadian companies were represented by the Government of Canada.

We think that is how it should be done. It is known as the OECD formula for investment protection, but that is not what we see in the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement. We can add to that Colombia's terrible human rights record, and I think we have very good reason to oppose such a bill to implement the agreement.

I would remind the House that my hon. Conservative colleague was talking about improvements earlier. I do not know where he sees any improvements, considering, for example, that in 2008 crimes committed by paramilitary groups increased by 41% and 14% the year before, and considering that, in 2001, there was a slight decrease in the number of murders of trade unionists, but in 2008, there were 46 such murders. So, clearly, human rights and union rights are being systematically violated.

By signing a free trade agreement with Colombia, Canada is condoning the state of human rights and union rights in that country. The Bloc Québécois refuses to be complicit in this, and Quebeckers will not be complicit in a situation that will benefit Canadian mining companies alone, at the expense of human rights and union rights. I am also convinced that environmental rights are not being respected, because, if we were to take a closer look, I think we would find that these mining companies do not respect the environment in Colombia.

I think I have been quite clear. No one will be surprised to learn that the Bloc Québécois will vote against Bill C-23 and will be very proud to do so.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Madam Speaker, I have a quick question and some clarification points. I am not sure where Bloc members stand on the situation when they mention the United States of America. They seem to be of the impression that the Americans are against what we are doing and they too are against it, but my research tells me that it is not the case. President Barrack Obama has admitted that they are proceeding and that he is confident that ultimately we can strike a deal that is good for the people of Colombia and good for the people of the United States. I certainly do not think Congress has tossed this out either.

I wonder if the hon. member could clarify his points on that matter. I think he did touch on the United States situation. I was wondering if he could give his reasoning why they are refusing this in light of the situation in America.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Madam Speaker, I do not think my colleague understood what I was saying or maybe he was not listening. The Doha round at the WTO is currently blocked. It is blocked because emerging countries do not want developed countries to be the only ones benefiting from freer trade. That should be the focus of debate regarding international trade. To avoid having to have this debate and having to make concessions to open the borders, the American government, under the Bush administration, decided to jump into all kinds of bilateral agreements with different countries. As I said, they were generally countries with which they did not have existing trade relationships, but that were not able to hold their own in the balance of power with the Americans.

I condemn the fact that Canada and its Conservative government took exactly the same approach, using the villages to surround and take the cities, as Mao Zedong said. They are currently trying to establish a model of free trade that does not take into account human rights, union rights or environmental rights.

The government is trying to force this on countries that cannot defend themselves, and make that the standard. That is unacceptable from a country like Canada or the United States. That is what President Obama said he would change.

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, numerous Liberal and Conservative members who have spoken to the bill have talked about the importance of signing the free trade agreement between Canada and Colombia as a way to improve human rights records in that country.

Does the member have any evidence that signing free trade agreements with any country has improved the human rights record of that country and, if he is aware of one, would he please tell me which one it would be?

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is clear to the Bloc Québécois and to most people in Quebec that human rights must come before trade.

I think that if human rights, labour rights and environmental rights were taken seriously, then free trade agreements and investment protection would also be subject to environmental, labour rights and human rights standards.

Major international conventions exist. They must be respected in order for the advantages in the agreement to apply. That is one way Canada and other developed countries could help democracy and prosperity flourish in these emerging countries and in developing countries.

I do not buy the argument that economics and freer trade alone will lead to democracy and prosperity. That has not been proven in the past and it will not be in the future.

The Economy

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Madam Speaker, in these difficult economic times, Canada needs to attract business growth and investment. That leads to more jobs and more opportunities for Canadians.

For years, under Liberal governments, high business taxes put Canada at a competitive disadvantage to the United States. That is why our government put the federal corporate tax rate on a downward track. The federal corporate tax rate will go down to 15% by 2012 from 22% just a few years ago.

Cutting taxes is working. Tim Hortons, a Canadian icon, has packed up its location in Delaware and is coming home, shifting its base of operations to be a Canadian company once again.

Our actions are driving business investment home and that is a stark contrast to the Liberal plan of higher taxes, higher spending, a plan that would only drive business the other way.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Madam Speaker, since being elected to Parliament, I have been involved in cultural matters. Today, I am pleased to tell you about a petition from the Fédération de la jeunesse franco-ontarienne or FESFO, signed by several hundred young Franco-Ontarians who are concerned about the decline in the revenues of CBC/Radio-Canada.

The FESFO is calling for Radio-Canada programming to be restored to its previous level in francophone Ontario and for the station in Windsor to be reopened.

Unfortunately, because of a technical detail, I am unable to present this petition in the House. However, I feel it is crucial that the minister responsible for CBC/Radio-Canada receive it, which is why I will give it to him by the end of question period.

I met with FESFO representatives, who also indicated that they would request a meeting with Sylvain Lafrance, executive vice-president of French services at CBC/Radio-Canada. I urge Mr. Lafrance to agree to meet with these people as soon as possible.

Ayer's Cliff 100th Anniversary

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Madam Speaker, Ayer's Cliff on Lake Massawippi, one of the most picturesque villages in my riding, is celebrating its 100th anniversary this year.

The first inhabitants of the village arrived in 1797 and called it Landmaid's Flat. The name was later changed to Ayer's Flat and finally to Ayer's Cliff.

Over time, the village has become a prime tourist destination. Ayer's Cliff is on the Townships Trail, which highlights the heritage of the Eastern Townships with its 415-kilometre marked road. The village is also known for its annual agricultural fair, and for one of the most beautiful campgrounds in Quebec as well as the Tomifobia Nature Trail which extends to the U.S. border.

For all these reasons, the Ayer's Cliff centennial is cause for celebration and something in which its inhabitants and Quebec can take pride.

Aboriginal Friendship Centres

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Madam Speaker, across the street from my office in Halifax is a colourful building with the word Pjila'si over the door. Pjila'si means welcome in Mi'Kmaq, and I have always felt welcome in this building, the Mi'Kmaq Native Friendship Centre.

However, the funding challenges that exist for Canada's 120 aboriginal friendship centres could end that warm welcome.

Fifty-four per cent of all aboriginal people live in urban areas and this number is increasing. With a relatively small investment from the Department of Canadian Heritage, we could ensure that services exist in urban areas for our first nations peoples, services that are culturally appropriate, accessible and stable.

It is my hope that a Prime Minister who recently declared that Canada has “no history of colonialism”, will at least recognize that strong investments in friendship centres are a strong investment for Canada.

Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan

[Rob Clarke, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Mr. Speaker, on August 31, it was my pleasure to announce, along with the Premier of Saskatchewan and local officials, that the town of Meadow Lake would become Saskatchewan's 14th city. For Meadow Lake, going from a town to a city is much more than a technical change.

It is recognition of the hard work of the Mayor Obrigewitsch, town council and community leaders and residents who have attracted new businesses and families to ensure that Meadow Lake thrived even during tough economic times.

Above recognizing past successes, becoming a city opens Meadow Lake to new investment opportunities and economic and social development.

My congratulations go out to Meadow Lake and I look forward to celebrating northern Saskatchewan's first city on November 9 with residents and community leaders alike.

Infrastructure

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, from time to time there comes an individual willing to stand up for what is right and just, exposing the truth no matter the consequences to himself or herself.

A regional councillor from York stood up against his own party and blew the whistle on politicized infrastructure spending. Gordon Landon lost his candidacy in the Conservative Party because he dared to tell the truth. Gordon Landon blew the whistle on a scandal of epic proportions, billions of taxpayer dollars being dumped in Conservative ridings for political purposes, billions of taxpayer dollars being manipulated to serve only the interest of the Prime Minister and his cabinet colleagues.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer requested documents last week to investigate the situation. Shockingly, the government refused his request.

This is how the government operates, firing candidates for exposing the truth and stonewalling the Parliamentary Budget Officer to cover up this massive scandal. This is how the Conservative government operates.

Highgate Fall Fair

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, last Saturday, September 26, I was pleased once again to attend the Highgate fall fair.

Highgate is located at the eastern border of my riding of Chatham-Kent—Essex, a charming village founded by Scottish settlers in the mid-1800s. It has celebrated the harvest with a country fair for the last 155 years.

This year we started with a parade, then enjoyed the local politicians squirm as they tried to outbid each other for an award-winning pie and then wandered about checking children's agricultural displays, animal attractions, old farm equipment, antique cars and fire trucks. We capped it off with some really great country barbecuing of hotdogs and hamburgers.

It was a great time again this year at the wonderful Highgate fair that has been enjoyed for 155 years.

Congratulations Highgate. We will see Highgate again next year as it celebrates 156 years of country hospitality.

Museums in Canada

[Roger Pomerleau, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today we are celebrating the first annual Canadian Museums Day. A number of museum directors are here on the Hill to talk about various issues, including federal government funding.

Every year, 59 million people visit museums and art galleries. Museums play an important economic role because they generate an estimated $17 billion in economic spinoffs. Museums employ over 24,000 people and spend $650 million annually on salaries. In Quebec, they are an essential part of teaching people about our culture and history.

In this context, we cannot ignore the strike at the Canadian Museum of Civilization and the Canadian War Museum. The Bloc Québécois would like to see this conflict resolved as soon as possible.

Museums and art galleries are a valuable resource that we should support with a solid museums policy and adequate funding.

Foreign Affairs

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, last week our Minister of Foreign Affairs led Canada at the United Nations General Assembly and proudly spoke on important issues for Canadians.

The minister strongly asserted Canada's foreign policy priorities: economic recovery, UN reform, human rights, climate change and terrorism. Our focus was clear and our priorities continue to project our values, Canadian values of freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

Leading by example, our government stands up for those unjustly detained in the world's most oppressive regimes. Leading by example, our government stands up for Canadians.

This government is finally giving Canada a strong principled voice on the international stage. This government will continue to be a leader in principled foreign policy as we prepare to host the G20 next year.

At home and abroad, Canadians know that they can count on this government.

Richard Wackid

[Michael Ignatieff, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to a man who loved Parliament, Richard Wackid, who died yesterday after a courageous struggle with ALS, Lou Gehrig's disease.

For over two decades, Rick was a friend and colleague to employees of all political stripes. His expertise put him at the centre of every debate held in this House.

To many people, he was a mentor. We admired his kindness, his dedication to his colleagues and his unshakable devotion to his work until the end.

Rick loved the institutions of Parliament and he became an institution in turn. We will miss his curly hair, his cufflinks, his humour, his humility, his wisdom and his friendship.

We extend our deepest sympathy to Rick's wife Danielle, his daughter Stephanie, and his entire family.

Today, Rick Wackid is at peace, and we will remember him always.

Terry Fox

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there are times when a member of Parliament receives the opportunity to do something extraordinary.

On Friday, September 25, on behalf of the Government of Canada, I was asked to unveil a plaque in St. John's, Newfoundland, honouring Terrance Stanley Fox at the site where he began his “Marathon of Hope”. I was joined by Terry's brother, Fred, many local dignitaries and hundreds of school children who, like tens of thousands of students across Canada, celebrated Terry's run on that day.

It was cold and damp, not unlike 29 years ago when Terry Fox ran for hope and ran for us. I met Terry and my memories of him are vivid. He was fiercely passionate and deeply caring.

As the inscription reads at Mile 0, “this is the place where a young man's dream began and a nation's hope lives on”.

Terry Fox will forever be remembered as one of our greatest Canadians. Well done, Terry. We continue to be proud of him.

All Canadians would want him to know we will continue his battle until cancer is conquered. Terry Fox: a Canadian hero.

Harmonized Sales Tax

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, when the Conservatives and Liberals bring in the harmonized sales tax, or HST, next July, families across Ontario will be taxed at a higher rate on children's vitamins, on newspapers, even on coffee. That is right. This is a tax on our trip to Tim Hortons. If we want to hire a lawyer to fight the HST, well, that will be taxed, too.

Why is this new tax being foisted on Ontarians? Because the federal Conservatives and provincial Liberals want to shift the tax burden from the wealthiest banks and oil companies to middle-income families, the very people most at risk from the decline in our Ontario industrial economy.

Along with Ontario NDP leader Andrea Horwath, we are fighting the HST because it would harm Ontario workers and their families.

Ontarians will not take this and neither will we. It is time to stop the HST, stop the attack on the middle class and stop the McGuinty-Harper tax grab.

Jeannette Corbiere Lavell

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

Mr. Speaker, on September 27, 2009, Jeannette Corbiere Lavell was elected president of the Native Women's Association of Canada. She is one of the founding members of the Ontario Native Women's Association.

She is probably best known for her challenge of section 12 of the Indian Act, which forced aboriginal women to lose their Indian status if they married a non-aboriginal person. In 1985, thankfully, section 12 of the Indian Act was finally repealed.

A champion of women's rights, she has worked tirelessly against injustice toward aboriginal women in particular.

In recognition of her efforts, an award has been set up in her name, which is presented annually to native women recipients who exhibit the same qualities and dedication as Ms. Corbiere Lavell.

We would like to congratulate Ms. Corbiere Lavell, and we are eager to work closely with her to improve the quality of life of native women in Canada.

Jonathan Couturier

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, once again, Quebec is mourning the loss of one of its sons, Private Jonathan Couturier, from Loretteville, who died on September 17 when his armoured vehicle struck an improvised explosive device. Eleven other soldiers were wounded in the same incident.

Our hearts go out to Private Couturier's family and friends following his sudden death. Private Couturier fought valiantly in Afghanistan. We must come together and show our respect for this soldier's commitment.

He fought courageously on the front lines, along with his fellow comrades-in-arms, who have been facing a particularly difficult situation recently.

My Bloc Québécois colleagues and I would like to offer our most sincere condolences to Private Jonathan Couturier's family, loved ones and fellow soldiers.

We wish them courage; our thoughts are with all of them.

Richard Wackid

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Mr. Speaker, it was with great sadness that I learned yesterday of the passing of our dear friend Richard Wackid.

Richard served every Liberal whip since Jean-Robert Gauthier and every Liberal leader since John Turner, with both honour and distinction. The consummate professional and team player, Richard was part of the glue that kept the Liberal caucus together in the best of times and the worst of times. He faced his battle with ALS just as he lived his life, with courage and dignity.

His love for the Liberal Party, the Liberal caucus and the House of Commons is an example for all political assistants, and this affection was only surpassed by his love for his wife Danielle and his daughter Stephanie.

On behalf of the entire team in the whip's office and our entire Liberal caucus, I would like to extend my most sincere condolences to Danielle and Stephanie. We will miss Rick.