House of Commons Hansard #54 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was tpp.

Topics

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:35 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I will remind the minister that she needs to address her questions to the chair, because, yes, I would have gotten the job done as well.

I just want to make sure that you are not insinuating anything on my behalf. Thank you very much.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Calgary Forest Lawn.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Oshawa.

It is a pleasure to speak on the motion. Before I start, I want to thank my colleague, the member for Abbotsford, who worked diligently on this file. We were in Bali together, along with the former prime minister, to talk about and negotiate the TPP. He put incalculable hours into it and, finally, we reached an agreement.

If I listened carefully enough to the Liberals and the Minister of International Trade, they all agree with the TPP. They just do not want to move ahead because, as they said during the campaign, they want to be a little different from the Conservatives. They do not want to give us credit for it. To be very frank, they will agree to this because it is a great deal for this country.

The minister already elaborated in her speech how great the trade agenda is for the government. She quoted the former prime minister, who was very well known as Mr. Dithers. The fact of the matter remains that the TPP is a great deal. It is a good deal for this country.

I have travelled across the world with my colleague from Abbotsford and the former prime minister. One of the most important things for this country is trade. The Conservative government had a great record, contrary to what the Liberal government says, of signing trade agreements around the world. It signed more trade agreements than when the Liberals were in power before the Conservatives took over.

Nevertheless, it is recognition of the fact—and I am sure my colleagues on the other side will recognize it as well—that we all have to work toward ensuring our prosperity. We are a resource-rich country and have excellent industries. We are a powerhouse on the world stage, and we want to remain a powerhouse on the world stage.

There will be some issues, but in the end, the TPP agreement will put Canada in a place where it will have access to markets that make up 60% of the world's population. That is a huge benefit to businesses and exporters.

The Liberal member for Surrey—Newton raised a question about the protectionism that is taking place around world. There is a referendum taking place in Britain and yesterday the former governor of the Bank of Canada, Mr. Carney, for whom I have a great deal of respect, announced that Britain would go into recession should it leave the European Union. Why would that be? It is because it would suddenly lose market access. We have to look at the factor of having market access. We are a medium-sized country with a very small population. We are rich in resources and we have to sell them.

Look at what is happening in my province of Alberta. Due to low oil prices, Alberta has been massively impacted. It is not only Alberta, but the whole country has been massively impacted by the low oil prices, the resource that we export. One of the biggest problems in Alberta right now, which everybody is talking about, is how to export our resources. We all agree that it should go through environmentally friendly reviews with first nations and everything else, which is a good thing.

However, ultimately, my colleagues on the other side, in the NDP and even the premier of Alberta, Premier Notley, agree that resources must reach tidewater so that we can sell them. If we do not sell them in the world market, then we will be facing massive problems, which we are already seeing right now in Calgary, in Alberta, where thousands of people are losing jobs. This impact is going across the country.

During the recession of 2008, we had massive infrastructure spending. Our government rose to the occasion. We helped the auto industry stay on its feet. The auto industry is an excellent example of why the export market is necessary. Most of our cars are marketed in the U.S.A.

Let us look at the huge market with respect to the TPP: Chile, Argentina, Japan, New Zealand, Australia, the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia. The TPP will put us into this massive market. Our businesses look forward to the TPP.

When I was the parliamentary secretary, business delegations would travel with us to other countries. Even the previous Liberal government took a lot of business delegations around the world in order to build a vibrant export market for Canada. Canada needs an export market to ensure we have good jobs and an economy that will be able to meet all the other important social needs such as health care, education, and other things.

We encourage the Liberals to get the message out. There is nothing wrong with us taking the ball and running with it. The minister has said that we will wait for the others but we do not need to wait for them. This agreement would be good for us. We are ready to go forward and sign it. We want to go forward. We do not want to wait for others to tell us. The Conservative government had an excellent track record of doing things.

The minister spoke about the trade committee. She talked about Paul Martin. I have been in this Parliament for 18 years so I know our committees are important. Canadians can appear at committees and give their views. Committee travel is not something new that the Liberal government has just come up with. When we were in government, committees travelled. That is their job. The Liberal government needs to understand that committees belong to Parliament. They do not belong to the government. Our committees respond to Parliament. Therefore, committee travel is a normal part of the consultation process. I am glad the committees are there.

We need to listen. We all know we need trade agreements for our country to prosper. We are a resource rich country and the agreements we have signed have always been in favour of Canada. NAFTA is an example.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Liberal

Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Surrey—Newton, BC

Madam Speaker, the hon. member for Calgary Forest Lawn might recall how great the Right Hon. Prime Minister Paul Martin was. He was the one who put our country on the strong financial footing, which we all enjoy today.

Coming back to the TPP, I had the opportunity to sit on the international trade committee. We travelled to the member's hometown of Calgary. We listened to the people across western Canada. Some people were in favour of the TPP and others were not.

The committee and the minister are doing great work consulting with Canadians. The member for Calgary Forest Lawn has to understand the importance of consulting with Canadians.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB

Let me get it straight, Madam Speaker. The member just paid a great tribute to former prime minister Paul Martin for balancing the budget, for getting it right. What is wrong with his government which is now going into deficit? Why is his party not willing to take any lessons from the gentleman who the member called such a great prime minister because he balanced a budget? His government is now going on a massive deficit spending spree without even having a plan on how to get back to a balanced budget. Maybe he should take some lessons from his former finance minister.

The fact is that we have been negotiating the TPP for a long time. It is better to send out the message to everybody that the TPP will be favourable to Canada. That is what we are trying to say.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

NDP

Brigitte Sansoucy NDP Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

I would like him to explain how he reconciles his support for the TPP with statements made by experts like Joseph Stiglitz, who called the TPP “the worst trade deal ever”, or Jim Balsillie, who said that there will never be another large Canadian tech company under the TPP.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB

Madam Speaker, we expect some people not to agree with the TPP. However, the best example is NAFTA. When NAFTA was being negotiated, the Liberals and her party fought against it. The ultimate result is that we all agree NAFTA is a benefit for Canada. That should answer her question.

There are questions, and maybe people do not like the TPP, like in the case of Mr. Balsillie. His company is already facing problems, but nevertheless BlackBerry is a great company.

NAFTA, which faced massive opposition by the others, has turned out to be a great agreement and has benefited Canada.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON

Madam Speaker, I thank the member across the way for his work in the House and on behalf of the Canada-India Parliamentary Friendship Group, which started up again last night.

This motion would not recognize the work of the committees, which he was defending as an important part of Parliament, where discussions are ongoing right now. We have not heard back from the trade committee, yet, on these talks.

Would the hon. member comment on not only the value of listening to Canadians, but taking their opinions into consideration when we are making decisions in the House?

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB

Madam Speaker, it is very important to listen to Canadians. Committees do that. It is great when they come back. The committee is already out there doing that. The committee will come back with recommendations, and the recommendation will be to move forward with adjustments here and there.

It is a great thing that the committee are out there listening to Canadians. There could be other venues where they can also consult Canadians. However, it is not wrong for the government to say that in principle it supports the TPP. It is time for the government to say that it is ready, in principle, to support the TPP.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Madam Speaker, as the member of Parliament for Oshawa, I rise in the House today to speak about the trans-Pacific partnership, a partnership that will allow our quality Canadian goods access to new markets in Asia-Pacific continents.

The proposed trade deal is a commitment that I hope the Liberal government will stop dithering about and make before June 29, as it is a strong indicator of the increased trade relations, which means good things for my community of Oshawa. Oshawa is where manufacturing in the automotive sector is extremely important, and we will be able to export our domestically-made vehicles to these newly-established markets.

The Canadian-European trade agreement opens Canada's market to over 500 million new customers. The 28 different countries that will be included in the Canadian-European free trade agreement have a combined GDP over $20 trillion, allowing Canada to access sound economic prosperity through the export of our domestic goods.

The previous Conservative government had laid down the groundwork of beginning the negotiation process and strived to ensure that Canadians would prosper as a result of the trade relations that had been freshly established in these markets. Our manufactured goods, including the vehicles that have been prepped for global sale by Ford Canada and Honda Canada, are seeing new investment because of access to the European market. Hopefully, with the TPP, vehicles manufactured in my community of Oshawa by General Motors will now have the increased ability to access markets, not only in Europe but also the Asia-Pacific.

As Oshawa is facing a contract renewal year in 2016, the establishment of new markets is pivotal for the decision process. It is also pivotal to companies making long-term decisions and long-term investments, especially those aimed at our export markets. After all, 85% of Canadian cars made are exported, meaning an expanded market will be beneficial to Canadian automotive manufacturers. This sort of commitment and flexibility is exactly what is needed for the automotive sector.

As I said, Oshawa is facing a contract year. This type of commitment will help decision makers understand the importance of investment and the potential that Canadian communities like Oshawa have to bolster exports and, simultaneously, the Canadian economy.

If the TPP goes through, Canada will be the only country in the world with access to North America, Asia, and the European Union, which is 1.3 billion new customers.

What is crucial for the Liberal government to understand is that we can grow the economy without spending billions of dollars that we do not have. Access to over 800 million new customers through the TPP is exactly the kind of trade partnership that will allow Canada to grow our economy and participate in the new reality of trade in the 21st century. Supporting the TPP will send a clear signal to Canadian businesses, allowing exporters the opportunity to prepare and take advantage of preferential market access with lower tariffs and further integration of global supply chains, setting the rules for trade within North America and the Asian-Pacific region for generations to come.

Under our Conservative government, Canada became a global leader in eliminating the barriers affecting trade and the fight against protectionism. Ratifying the TPP at this time gives the Liberals a chance to prove they are actually serious about trade. Canada needs to continue to be a leader of trade relations and eliminating barriers and red tape.

Job creation and manufacturing has unfortunately become a stalled priority for the Liberal government. As a Conservative government, we understood that jobs were a vital part of our economy, in any climate. Even during the global recession, under our Conservative government, we saw the creation of 1.1 million net new jobs. That is because we know the recipe for job creation. The method includes freer trade, lower taxes, minimal red tape, and responsible spending of taxpayer money. Why do the Liberals not respect these principles?

Job-creating businesses will not invest in the Canadian economy if they do not know the cost and the environment of doing business. The Liberal government has failed to deliver a strong plan to support the manufacturing sector. From the start, the Liberal government has ignored the sector in its Speech from the Thrown and continues to offer nothing concrete to support manufacturers. This is not surprising, considering the Prime Minister actually said that Canada needed to transition away from manufacturing.

Frankly, the Prime Minister and the Liberal government are out of touch with the lifeblood of many Canadian communities. My community of Oshawa has been an automotive manufacturing hub for many years. Manufacturing is a significant driver in our local economy and provides thousands of good-paying middle-class jobs across our country.

I was proud to sponsor a petition put forward by a local union shop steward that calls on the government to immediately release its plan to support manufacturing in communities like Oshawa.

The Liberal government has chosen to extend the automotive innovation fund and promised to be flexible with how it operates, but many of my constituents from the auto sector in Oshawa want to know why the government has not included any details about flexibility. A strong position on the TPP will give certainty to international investors, who will see Canada as the preferred location for new investments for access to more markets around the world.

If we establish this new trade deal, there will be no need to transition away from manufacturing, as the Prime Minister wants to do. In fact, we should see even greater manufacturing, good jobs, and more investment, as Canada's role in the world expands through TPP.

Instead, unfortunately, the Liberals have only offered more confusion. This year, as I said, is a contract year for auto manufacturing at Oshawa's General Motors plant in my riding. A decision needs to be made sooner rather than later for the TPP, so we can be established for future investment of industry in Oshawa.

Manufacturing provides thousands of good-paying middle-class jobs in Oshawa, and it is a shame that the Liberal government has not done more to promote the industry and build a competitive atmosphere where businesses would want to invest. Instead, they only offer confusion. The cost of doing business will increase with some of the Liberals' policies on new taxes, such as carbon taxes. The Ontario Liberals put in their pension plan. They want to put in a CPP payroll tax and extreme hydro rates. It is killing the industry and making us less competitive. The TPP will help offset some of these poor policies by the Liberals.

The automotive industry and union members need more certainty, not more confusion. Automotive investments are made five to 10 years into the future. They need certainty. They need commitment for their investments in order to create good-quality jobs. That is why a decision on the TPP is required sooner, not later.

During this new trade deal, there will be no need to transition away from manufacturing. In fact, this will be great for our Canadian economy. Canada will be the hub for manufacturing in North America, Asia, and Europe. We are the only country that will have access to these markets, and it is a great opportunity. We should not be afraid of it.

During the economic crisis, we, as the Conservative government, were flexible, looking forward, and I was very proud to be part of a government that saved the automotive sector in Canada. As a result of that flexibility, we managed to do what needed to be done to save jobs and save operations in Canada. Trade deals like CETA and TPP are central to growing an economy and promoting investment and job growth in Canada for communities such as Oshawa.

I would like to finish by talking about some of the numbers we have seen. On trade, I have heard the Liberals today talk about our exports versus our imports. If I could quote some numbers from Stats Canada, between 2010 and 2014, our exports increased from $103 billion to $528 billion. That is a 32% increase in just four years. Our imports grew from $413 billion to $524 billion. This shows that our approach to growing the economy has worked by opening freer markets.

What it means, quite simply, is that our exports grew 32%. In the worst economic recession since the Great Depression, we were able to create 1.2 million net new jobs, and Canadians had more money in their pocket. They were able to buy more things and we were able to import more things.

In closing, I want to encourage the Liberal government to stop dithering. Businesses and communities such as mine need certainty. In Oshawa this year, there is going to be a decision made. During this contract year, please stop dithering. Give a solid signal to the business sector, to companies that want to invest in Canada, that want to be part of Canada being a world hub for export and automotive export around Asia, North America, and Europe. Allow that to take place by making a decision on the TPP.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, I think it is important that the member realizes that there are 12 countries participating in this; that none of those countries have actually signed off on the TPP; that Canadians, as a whole, have a great deal of concern regarding it; and that the Government of Canada made a commitment during the last election that we were going to work with Canadians, the different stakeholders, and do a proper consultation job, something that was not done by the former government.

Recognizing how important trade is to Canada and the world, and the benefits of it, the Liberal Party has a good record in supporting and getting behind trade.

The question I have for the member is, why does he believe that Canada has to be the first country to sign this agreement when in fact all the other countries are doing their job and due diligence, and consulting with their citizens? Does he not believe that Canadians have the right to know the context?

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for a very important question. However, it is about certainty. The reality is that this is an agreement on which one is either in or out, and the Liberals do have to decide. I would ask the member in return what the Liberals' plan is if we do not sign on to the TPP.

As he knows, in communities such as mine, with the automotive sector, these are American companies that have invested in Canada. These are American companies that are creating good-quality manufacturing jobs in Canada. If the Americans do decide to sign on and Canada signals that it is not going to be signing on, what does that mean for communities such as mine? Why would an American company continue their operations in Canada if we are not signed on to the same agreement as the American government?

Therefore, it is extremely important that the Liberals stop dithering and make a decision.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

NDP

Brigitte Sansoucy NDP Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech. He spoke about the importance of supporting the manufacturing sector.

I represent Quebec's agri-food capital and, therefore, I am concerned about the impact of the TPP on the agriculture sector. I am also worried about the 60,000 jobs that could be lost with the ratification of the TPP.

I wonder what my colleague thinks about the fact that the government does not seem to be making any definite commitment to provide compensation to sectors, such as the agricultural sector, that could be directly affected by the ratification of the TPP.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Madam Speaker, I have a lot more confidence in Canada's agricultural sector than the member across the way. The reality is, when Canadians have the opportunity to compete, we win.

What this agreement means for Canadian agricultural products is that we will have access to 800 million new customers. To put that into perspective, Canada is a country of 35 million people. We will suddenly be able to sell our goods not only to some of the biggest economies in the world, but some of the fastest-growing economies, and we can do that in a preferential way. By signing on and being part of this original agreement as well, Canada is in a preferential role for any new agreements for anybody who wants to sign on to this agreement moving forward.

Of course, there will be the naysayers and the people who are concerned, but the reality is, with the free trade agreements that we have signed in the past, we have always done well. However, without this agreement, it is actually going to put our agricultural community at a disadvantage for future trade.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Madam Speaker, it is great to hear the member talk about the auto sector. I was working as a staffer at the time our government was involved in that, and it was a lot of hard work by the member and many others to get that done.

The government says that it would like to hold more consultations on the trans-Pacific partnership. However, when the previous government announced the partnership and the planned compensation, a number of groups were very enthusiastic. The only group opposing this treaty also opposes all economic agreements.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Madam Speaker, I didn't quite get the gist of the entire question, but I did get the idea that, with consultation, there were some very enthusiastic groups about the agreement. That is the reality.

Very rarely does Canada get the opportunity to open up a new market that has 800 million, almost one billion, people in new markets for our products. It is something that we should be applauding and making sure we are a part of.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Hull—Aylmer.

I am pleased to speak today to the considerable benefits of international trade for Canada's agriculture and agri-food industry. This sector accounts for more than $60 billion of Canada's exports, generates more than $100 billion, or almost 7% of Canada's GDP, and creates jobs for more than two million Canadians.

Approximately half of Canada's agricultural production is exported. More than one-third of our wheat harvest is destined for foreign markets. Two-thirds of our pork, 85% of our canola and 90% of our pulse crops are exported.

I am proud to represent a region that has a wealth of agricultural activity. Glengarry—Prescott—Russell has many grain, beef, pork, lamb, and even rabbit producers, as well as many dairy farmers, whom I am proud to represent. These local producers all benefit from international trade opportunities.

Take soybeans, for example. Soybean production is booming in eastern Ontario and the rest of Canada. Soybeans were planted on 5.4 million acres in 2015, which is an increase of 77% over 2008. Soy is the fourth-largest crop in Canada. This agricultural sector alone generated $2.4 billion in 2015. This extraordinary growth would not be possible without access to foreign markets.

Canada has a solid record as a reliable supplier of high-quality seed to international markets. We have export capacity on the east and west coasts. We have modern, efficient infrastructure, as well as world-class management. Half of all jobs in crop and seed production depend on exports, and one in four jobs depends on food processing.

Trade benefits more than just producers and processors. In 2015, Canadian farm equipment manufacturers exported $1.8 billion in products to 154 different countries.

These business opportunities translate into economic growth here in Canada, growth that is essential to rural communities. We must continue to provide business opportunities to Canada's farming sector. That is why our government recognizes the importance of international trade.

I would like to remind hon. members that the government is in favour of international trade. The Government of Canada supports free trade as a means of opening markets for Canadian agriculture and agrifood producers, growing Canadian farms, creating well-paying jobs for Canadians, and providing choice and lower prices to Canadian consumers. In short, Canada is a trading nation. Trade agreements help Canada's agrifood sector to further develop its exports for the good of our country and our economy.

The trans-Pacific partnership provides business opportunities for Canadian agriculture. It goes without saying that the government will take a responsible approach by carefully examining all of the details of that agreement.

We are committed to holding a full and open debate in Parliament. That is what we are doing here today. That is what the Standing Committee on International Trade is doing right now, and that is what we are going to do later by debating this issue here in the House, as we promised. We are also committed to ensuring that Canadians are informed and consulted about this important agreement, something that the former government did not do. The hon. Minister of International Trade and the hon. Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food have already met with a wide range of representatives from all areas of the agrifood industry, including supply management agencies. Supply management is an important issue for me and the people in my riding. The ministers want to hear these representatives' opinions on key issues.

Canadians have the right to know what impact this agreement will have on our country's various industries. We are going to continue to talk with them about the TPP and other issues. The government also recognizes the important role that the supply management sector plays in keeping Canada's economy strong. This sector accounts for nearly 300,000 jobs and $32 billion in economic gains.

If the TPP comes into effect, the Government of Canada is well aware that the supply managed sectors will need mitigation measures.

I am one of the biggest proponents of the supply management system. This system has a proven track record, and it has a place in Canada's economy. We must consider the agricultural sector as a whole, and not as an industry divided between supply management and the free market. We have an approach based on growing the agricultural sector as a whole, and this is the best solution for all Canadians.

I set up a local agricultural committee in my riding, to bring together the various agricultural sectors in my region. This committee has been widely applauded. The various agricultural sectors have much in common, and we all win when we work together.

In closing, I would like to say that we are at a time of tremendous opportunity for Canada's agri-food sector. Agricultural exports are at an all-time record high. Producer incomes and balance sheets are expected to remain at historic levels. The agri-food sector is one of Canada's most dynamic export sectors. It is estimated that up to 50,000 new agriculture-related jobs will be created across Canada in the next five years, both on and off farms, on top of existing vacancies. Some estimate those vacancies to be in excess of 25,000 jobs. With our small population and huge production capacity, Canada is the world's leading agricultural trader on a per capita basis.

Meanwhile, global demand for food is projected to increase by 60% by 2050. Our farmers have the responsibility and the ability to feed the planet. For farmers and food processors, this is tremendous news. The future is bright for Canadian farmers and food processors, with growing demand for the excellent products we grow here in Canada.

The government will work hard to open new markets for farmers and food processors. We are doing the right thing: consulting them and all Canadians on the TPP.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Madam Speaker, the member is a strong voice for agriculture and is one heck of a hockey player. If there is ever a team looking for a player, they should pick him up.

The member talked about the importance of the supply management sector. A large part of my riding in southern Alberta is dairy farming, and they are very concerned about the role that supply management will take in the trans-Pacific partnership.

Initially, when we announced that negotiations were taking place on the partnership, the supply management sector, especially the dairy farmers, were very pleased with the agreement we had reached, and especially with the compensation package that was there, that should they suffer due to the trans-Pacific partnership, there would be a safety net there for them.

However, we have not heard from the Liberal government that there is a compensation package in place. Is a compensation package part of the TPP in supply management?

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Madam Speaker, I am not sure I am that great a hockey player, although that is what my colleague here says.

We have a proven record in terms of negotiating with the dairy sector for compensation when free trade agreements are signed and ratified. We are talking about CETA. We have engaged with the dairy sector. If we do decide to ratify TPP, I know I will be fighting for the dairy sector to ensure that there is compensation. I know the Minister of Agriculture will negotiate with the dairy sector to ensure that there is proper compensation.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

NDP

Ruth Ellen Brosseau NDP Berthier—Maskinongé, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech in the House. It is a pleasure to work with him in the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.

My colleague knows full well that trade agreements undermine our supply management system. Last year, we lost more than 250 family farms in the dairy industry in Quebec. The trans-Pacific partnership and the Canada-European Union trade agreement also undermine our supply management system. The former Conservative government promised compensation.

Given how important and urgent it is to resolve the problem of diafiltered milk, the Liberal government is now saying again that it is consulting the dairy and poultry industries.

I would like my colleague to comment on the importance of compensating for losses and strengthening and defending our entire supply management system, as well as on the urgent need to act as soon as possible on the issue of diafiltered milk.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question.

The dairy sector is important to me. In my riding, there are more than 300 dairy farmers. We promised to consult the farming sector and dairy farmers on compensation in the Canada-European Union trade agreement, and that is precisely what we are going to do in three weeks' time.

Diafiltered milk is a very important issue and others are as well. We will continue to work with the dairy farmers in order to find solutions not just for the short term, but also for the long term, in order to ensure growth in the dairy sector.

As I said, in my riding more than 300 farmers work in the dairy sector. I want to ensure that young people will be able to take over the family farm. We must work to help the next generation of dairy farmers.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Liberal

Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell for his speech today and also for the work he does on the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food on which we both serve together.

In the previous question, the member for Berthier—Maskinongé indicated it was shameful that this committee was not studying the TPP. Maybe the hon. member could explain why that is so.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Madam Speaker, at the time, we were not sure where we would go with the committee, but the committee on international trade decided to embark on a cross-Canada consultation, and they have already met with the Saskatchewan Cattlemen's Association, the Alberta Wheat Commission, National Farmers Union, British Columbia Cattlemen's Association, Canadian Agri-food Trade Alliance, Manitoba Beef Producers, Cereals Canada, Manitoba Pork Council, and more.

I can assure the member, the chair of the committee is a farmer himself and the agricultural sector will be consulted.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Hull—Aylmer Québec

Liberal

Greg Fergus LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Innovation

Madam Speaker, Canada is a trading nation and has always depended heavily on international trade and investment for its economic well-being.

We live in a vast country with a relatively small population, and we enjoy a high standard of living. We produce more goods and services than Canadians consume. As a result, we sell our products and services abroad, which helps maintain a strong economy.

Canadian consumers also reap the benefits of international trade, which gives them a greater variety of goods at better prices. We are striving to maintain access to international markets, since a free and open environment for international trade and investment helps businesses prosper and gives middle-class Canadians access to better jobs.

This point can be found in the Minister of International Trade's mandate letter and in her commitment to increase Canada's trade and to attract job-creating investment to Canada, in particular by implementing free trade agreements and expanding the existing ones.

These trade agreements provide access to international markets for Canadian goods and services and help combat protectionism. These agreements improve operating conditions for our companies by committing signatory countries to transparent, rule-based systems. These help establish a more predictable environment for trade and investment. This is important to a middle power like Canada.

The hon. Minister of International Trade is working hard to secure access to these international markets and to generate opportunities for our Canadian companies outside our borders. I remind my hon. colleagues of one of her first successes back in November 2015, when she managed to get the Americans to eliminate their requirement for country of origin labelling, also known as COOL.

The previous government tried, unsuccessfully, to convince the Americans to eliminate this mandatory labelling requirement. With our new government's new approach, we were able to eliminate this non-tariff barrier to trade and enable Canadian companies to expand their markets into the United States.

This kind of success stems not only from our new results-oriented business approach, but also from our new political approach regarding the United States. The U.S. is our largest trading partner. The previous government failed to establish a strong political relationship, which was of no benefit when it had to address such issues as mandatory country-of-origin labelling.

The Minister of International Trade is also working very hard toward the successful conclusion of another file, namely the free trade agreement with Europe. The minister has had several meetings with her European counterpart, Cecilia Malmström, in order to establish a working relationship with her and build strong trust so we can advance this trade issue that is important to Canada and Canadian businesses.

The minister also travelled to Berlin and Brussels in April to promote this important free trade agreement and to speak with politicians and economic stakeholders, in order to ensure that this agreement will be ratified this year and will go into effect in 2017.

Expediting the entry into force of this agreement is a key priority for our government, but it is not the only priority. Canada also recently updated its free trade agreements with Chile and Israel and entered into a free trade agreement with Ukraine. The timely implementation of these agreements is also a priority for the Minister of International Trade and our government.

Furthermore, our government is exploring ways of developing our trade relations with China and India.

Regarding the trans-Pacific partnership, the government is engaging in a full and open consultation process, including in Parliament.

I also want to inform the House and all my constituents in Hull—Aylmer that I am organizing a public forum to discuss the TPP. It will be held on May 31 at 7:00 p.m. at the Université du Québec en Outaouais. I hope that many of my colleagues will also participate by joining my constituents in having a good discussion of the trans-Pacific partnership.

Apart from free trade agreements, the government uses other tools and instruments to improve access to international markets for Canadian businesses. Canada's foreign investment promotion and protection agreements, or FIPAs, are bilateral international investment agreements that provide a rules-based legal framework. Canada has 30 FIPAs in place that provide a stable, predictable, and transparent trade environment for Canadian investors operating abroad.

Air transport agreements also support trade by governing the opportunities for scheduled commercial flights between Canada and over 100 other countries around the world. These agreements, which are often the first agreements reached with many partners, facilitate the flow of passengers and goods and foster competition. They therefore facilitate trade and investment, as well as people-to-people ties.

In closing, our government is committed to ensuring that Canada is well positioned to take advantage of economic opportunities through international trade.

The mandate letter to the Minister of International Trade includes a commitment to increase Canada’s trade and attract job-creating investment to Canada, for instance, by implementing and expanding Canada's free trade agreements with other countries.

Our government considers this a top priority and is working hard to deliver on it.

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Madam Speaker, the members of the current government have again gone on and talked about open and transparent ways and said that they are going to consult with Canadians.

The members of the Conservative Party believe that we must have true consultation with Canadians, and that Canadians need to be part of the process. I want to make sure the current government understands that, if it is going to consult with Canadians, it should at least allow Canadians to have factual information and be able to have all the facts about an agreement in place and the benefits of it.

I am asking this for my hon. colleague. Does he not believe that having true consultations means providing the right information and factual information so that Canadians can make the best decision?

Opposition Motion—Trans-Pacific PartnershipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Liberal

Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to say for my hon. colleague from Cariboo—Prince George that of course we agree that Canadians should have the facts and the factual information available to them.

That is precisely why, as an example, the Minister of International Trade had signed the trans-Pacific partnership. It was so we would be able to share the information with Canadians and we would be able to provide the agreement. That does not say that we have ratified the agreement. That will be a discussion to be had among Canadians and among their representatives here in the House of Commons, so that we can take a decision together.

The reason why we signed the agreement is so we could share that information with all Canadians. That is the reason why I am organizing a public forum in my riding to discuss the trans-Pacific partnership, for and against, and to listen to what Canadians have to say.