Debates of Nov. 17th, 2016

International Trade

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, under the leadership of our Prime Minister, GM Canada has brought 1,000 engineers to Canada. These are engineering jobs that will create more jobs in Canada.

With respect to NAFTA, the member opposite should know that when it came into effect, our collective economies were around $8 trillion. Today our collective economies stand at $20.6 trillion.

We recognize the importance of trade. We will engage with the United States. We will work with it to ensure we advance Canada's interests that will create good quality jobs in Canada and grow the economy.

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Yes, Mr. Speaker, and the Conservative Party signed this agreement because we knew it would be good for the country. That is what happened.

The Americans' shift on NAFTA obviously has people deeply concerned about the softwood lumber agreement. A surge of American protectionism would cause greater uncertainty and risks for forestry jobs in Canada.

How are they going to deal with this protectionist movement? We hope the government will be able to fully assert the rights of Canadian workers.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, our government has engaged and worked very closely with the U.S. on the softwood lumber file. The softwood lumber agreement expired with the previous government. Our government is absolutely engaged with the current administration. We will work with the new president-elect and congress to address and advance this issue.

Our government understands the importance of good quality jobs in the forestry sector. We will advance this and beef and other contentious issues as well.

Our Prime Minister has been clear. We are open to ideas, open to people, and open to trade. That is how we will grow our economy.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, Canada needs NAFTA. It has created millions of jobs and attracted billions of dollars in investments. Although president-elect Trump has promised to tear up this important agreement, everybody knows that his issues are with Mexico, not Canada.

Why would the Prime Minister so foolishly wave the white flag, say that he would open up this agreement and put so many jobs at jeopardy? Why was he so foolish to do this?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, our Prime Minister has consistently advanced Canada's interests. He knows that in order to do that, we have to be open and candid with our allies, including our most important friends, partner, and ally. That was why we proactively said that we understood the importance of trade, not only to Canada but also to the United States. Nine million jobs in the U.S. depend upon Canada. Thirty-five states in the U.S. depend on Canada as their number one customer.

It is important to remember the mutual benefits associated with trade. That is why we had an open, candid, and honest conversation. That is what Canadians expect and that is exactly what we will do.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it was an incredibly foolish and naive move on the part of the Prime Minister.

TPP is an agreement that is also at risk and it is also an agreement that Canadians need. The upcoming U.S. administration has indicated that it will not move forward on TPP, but that does not mean Canada does not have to and should not move forward with TPP.

Will the Prime Minister commit to standing up for Canada's economic interests, and at this weekend's APEC summit aggressively and persistently act to keep the TPP moving forward, or is he going to do something foolish again?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, it was the government opposite that negotiated TPP in secret. It is our government that has been very open and transparent with Canadians. That is why we are engaging with all sectors of the economy, all Canadians on this very important issue.

It is important that we bring people in. If we do not, we see the challenges of protectionism on the rise. That is because when governments do things in secret, it really undermines the trust that Canadians have. We have been very clear. We will engage with them to gain their trust, to advance our national interests, to promote trade. When it comes to TPP or NAFTA, we will always make sure Canada's interests are first and foremost.

Democratic Reform

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in their campaign platform, in the throne speech, and dozens of times in the House of Commons, the Liberals have said it is time to get rid of the out-of-date and unfair first past the post voting system. However, today under the guise of consultation, we see the Liberals engaging in decision-based evidence making apparently designed to maintain the status quo.

Here is a bit of real evidence for the government. Almost 90% of those who testified in front of the multi-party electoral reform committee said that it was time for proportional representation. Canadians want their voices to be heard. They want their votes to count.

Will the government respect Canadians and keep its promise to make 2015 the last election under first past the post?

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Minister of Democratic Institutions]

Mr. Speaker, it is a great privilege for me to stand here on traditional Algonquin land.

I want to thank the members of the committee who have worked so hard and so diligently to hear from Canadians, and have worked together to provide the House with a report. I look forward to receiving that report on December 1, and coming back to the House with a thoughtful plan forward.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the New Democrats are doing everything in our power to achieve one of the hardest things in Canadian politics, actually have Liberals keep Liberal promises.

Almost 70% of MP town hall reports, 88% of expert witnesses, and 87% of Canadians who testified at the committee want a fair, proportional voting system. Apparently that is not enough for the government. A report out today says that the Liberals are actually spending $2 million on a pop psych survey to argue against electoral reform.

Will the minister at least agree that the facts are overwhelmingly in support of a proportional voting system, yes or no?

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Minister of Democratic Institutions]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member opposite for his commitment to this file and I want to thank him for bringing up something that we have been working on for months.

We want to find as many ways as possible to hear from as many Canadians as possible on the topic of electoral reform. We want to hear about the values that matter most to them. To that end, we are working with Vox Pop Labs on a new initiative. The member opposite understands full well that standard procedures require testing and pre-testing. We will have more information on this initiative in the coming days.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, all of us have heard people say that they will not vote because it will not make a difference. They are not completely wrong.

In the last election, nine million votes did not count at all because our old voting system is completely unfair. Across the country, Canadians, civil society, and experts are calling for the introduction of a proportional voting system.

Will the government listen and ensure that every vote counts so that we have a voting system that truly respects the will of the people?

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Minister of Democratic Institutions]

Mr. Speaker, we listened to Canadians when we proposed the special committee to go out and hear from Canadians. We listened to Canadians and the members of the House when we changed the composition of that committee so the majority would be with the opposition. We will listen to Canadians in new and innovative ways.

I look forward to receiving the committee's report on its recommendations on how we can best move forward. We will present the House with a thoughtful plan once we receive its report.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, they will listen until they hear what they want.

During the election campaign, the Liberal leader promised, with his hand on his heart, that the 2015 election would be the last under the current voting system. He promised and swore that he would make it happen, that he was serious about it. Confidence, integrity, and respect; it was all there.

However, since the Liberals took office, things are not as clear. They are qualifying their remarks, looking for a way out, and producing phoney surveys. The people want change, as do the opposition parties.

Do members believe it was a real promise or a joke?

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Minister of Democratic Institutions]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows full well that we have been committed to this file since we began our mandate. The member opposite knows full well that there is a committee in place right now deliberating the outcomes that it would like to present to the House. The member opposite knows full well that from the very beginning we were clear that we would not move forward on reform without the broad support of Canadians. I look forward to receiving that report on December 1.

International Trade

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government is sending mixed messages to the Canadian business community. Yesterday, Canada's ambassador to the U.S. said that Canada needed to work harder to educate Americans on the benefits of NAFTA. I could not agree more. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister served up NAFTA to president-elect Trump on a silver platter.

Why are the Prime Minister and his ambassador not on the same page on Canada's most important trade deal?

[David Lametti, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his work on the trade file.

The benefits of NAFTA are clear for Canada and the United States. In 2015, trilateral merchandise trade amounted to over $1 trillion. That is a growth of 3.6 times since 1993. The U.S. is our largest and most important trading partner. We are always going to look at ways to strengthen that relationship.

Trading agreements are important. We are always going to look at ways to better those, too, and that we will do in good faith. We are open to potential improvements, and that we will do.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Mr. Speaker, for over a year, the Liberals have claimed that the relationship between the Prime Minister and the president of the U.S. has been unprecedented. As a matter of fact, the Minister of International Trade stood in the House and said that the president of the U.S. was absolutely giddy over this new relationship.

Well, this unprecedented new relationship has brought absolutely nothing to Canada, no new softwood lumber agreement. Within hours of the U.S. election results, the Prime Minister was on bended knee offering to renegotiate NAFTA. This will have a hugely negative impact on the 400,000 Canadians who depend on the forestry industry.

Why is the government so against Canadian jobs?

[David Lametti, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, on the forestry file, we have worked since day one, taking over from a previous government that had not worked on it at all, that had not opened renegotiations. We have done that. We have consulted across the country. We have, at a number of different levels, continued to pursue negotiations with our American partner.

As regards NAFTA, we know we have an important relationship with the United States. We know how important NAFTA is. We plan to continue to work with our partners to improve that relationship and that treaty over time.

Finance

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on page 3 of the report that he issued today, the parliamentary budget officer wrote, “the performance measurement framework for some aspects of federal spending has been uneven.”

In other words, we have no clue where we are going and there is a major lack of transparency.

I am reaching out to the Minister of Finance for the eighth time. Does he have any idea when Canada will return to a balanced budget?

[Bill Morneau, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, we know that it is very important to invest in the future of Canadians and the middle class. There is no doubt that these investments will improve our situation in the future by generating growth for the middle class and for people who want good jobs in the future.

That is our plan for Canada. It is a good plan for a future that is better than things have been these past 10 years.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, for the eighth time in a row, the minister does not have a single idea when we will get back to zero deficit, but I have a cue for the minister. Zero deficit will be achieved under the next Conservative government.

Until then, we will have to live with this government for three years.

What is the government going to do to help Canadians and business owners? Will imposing a carbon tax, increasing pension plan contributions, and failing to lower taxes for companies that create wealth in Canada help them? No, it will not.

[Bill Morneau, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the reason we are acting now is because Canadians cannot wait. They need jobs today and tomorrow.

It is particularly ironic that the party that has focused on the wealthiest Canadians, the party that is playing games with the Canada pension plan, which would help the middle class, the party that has voted against the middle-class tax cut, the party that has voted against the Canada child benefit, helping nine out of 10 families, is talking about how we can help the middle class. We are focusing on how we can help Canadians to do better, today and tomorrow.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I had no trouble hearing the question. I had some trouble hearing the answer. Let us all listen.

The hon. member for South Surrey—White Rock has the floor.

Infrastructure

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian communities have lost $15 billion in infrastructure funding in order to finance the Liberals' new bank. Less than 1% of the promised infrastructure projects are actually under construction, and zero full-time jobs have been created since the Liberals took office.

The minister has stated that he still has lots of questions about the design of this bank. Why are the Liberals focusing their efforts on selling infrastructure to foreign interests instead of creating jobs for out of work Canadians here at home?