Debates of Sept. 17th, 2018

Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation Act

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I also look forward to working with my colleague on the committee. I respectfully disagree with him. Our government did the right thing. The previous government left things on the table when it came to the TPP. We heard from so many Canadians that there were problematic clauses within the previous version of the TPP. Our government has made sure that it has improved the previous version of the TPP. Today, we are protecting workers' rights, indigenous rights, environmental rights, intellectual properties and we are protecting investor dispute mechanisms.

I understand why the Conservatives want to capitulate to any deal, but we have been telling Canadians from the beginning that we are eager to sign a deal, but a good deal, not just any deal.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Vaughan—Woodbridge.

I am pleased to have the opportunity today to speak in favour of Bill C-79, an act to implement the comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans-Pacific partnership between Canada, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. The CPTPP, as this historic trade agreement is now known, would benefit Canadians from coast to coast to coast and across all sectors of our economy.

Through the CPTPP, our government is demonstrating our commitment to growing our economy and strengthening the middle class by expanding and diversifying Canada's trade and investment relations. Canada as a nation builds on trade and as a medium-sized economy, trade is fundamental to our continued prosperity and economic growth.

While Asia has more than doubled in importance as a destination for Canadian goods and services since the turn of the century, Canada has lost market share to our competitors that have pursued closer integration with the region's fastest growing economies. The CPTPP will help remedy this. It will be the cornerstone agreement for Canada to diversify our trade and investment toward Asia and enhance our export presence in the region.

The 11 CPTPP members represent a total of 495 million consumers and 13.5% of global GDP. Canada's exports to our CPTPP partners totalled nearly $27 billion in 2017. The CPTPP would provide Canadians with the tremendous opportunity to continue to expand their business in Asia.

Trade has long been a powerful engine that drives the Canadian economy. Canadian jobs and prosperity depend heavily on our connectivity with other countries around the world. In fact, one in five jobs in Canada is related to exports, while Canadian exports amount to nearly one-third of Canada's GDP.

Opening borders to trade and investment and diversifying our trading partners has the potential to boost Canada's wealth and make us less vulnerable to changing conditions in any one market. Canadian small- and medium-sized enterprises in particular are looking for our government to open up new markets for potential exports, and the CPTPP will help us deliver on this task.

Implementing and ratifying this trade agreement will strengthen our economic ties with the 10 other CPTPP members, which include seven new free trade agreement partners: Australia, Brunei, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam.

Once the CPTPP enters into force, Canada will have preferential access to 51 different countries through 14 trade agreements, representing nearly 1.5 billion consumers and over 60% of the global economy.

The CPTPP is projected to boost Canada's GDP by $4.2 billion over the long term and that growth will be driven by increased exports of goods and services, and increases in investment. This means more jobs and more prosperity for Canadians.

For trade in goods, the CPTPP would help Canadian businesses increase their sales and profits by virtually eliminating all tariffs, most of which would be eliminated upon entry into force of the agreement and establishing mechanisms to address non-tariff barriers to create more predictable and transparent trading conditions.

The CPTPP would allow Canadian companies to level the playing field with competitors that currently enjoy preferential access to key markets like Japan, Malaysia and Vietnam, while gaining a competitive advantage over other countries that currently do not have the same level of access. It would help Canadian companies to establish customer relationships, networks and other joint partnerships and offer Canada the opportunity to further integrate with global supply chains.

Opening up new markets for our products means that Canada would be at an advantage to export more agriculture and agri-food, fish and seafood, industrial machinery, and everything in between.

In Newfoundland and Labrador, this would mean new markets or reduced tariffs not only for our fish, seafood, metals, minerals and forestry products, but also for the specialized industrial products our industry has pioneered in the offshore.

Opening up new markets for our fish and seafood industry would mean more opportunities for shrimp, salmon, halibut, lobster, clams, mussels and snow crab, supporting close to 76,000 Canadian jobs based mostly in rural and coastal communities like mine, to help expand the over $85 million in regional trade that we have enjoyed over the past two years.

In the case of metals and minerals, it means expanded market share for the petroleum and iron ore products sold from my province to Asia.

Opening up new markets for our manufacturing sector means Newfoundland companies in the aerospace and marine technology sectors like Kraken Robotics, PAL Aerospace, Virtual Marine, SubC Imaging, and others in our oceans supercluster would have new opportunities to compete fairly in the trans-Pacific region.

I have mentioned just a few portions of Canada's vibrant economy. There are many more sectors whose exporters would benefit from the CPTPP. Securing preferential access to CPTPP markets means that almost all Canadian products could be exported to our new partners without facing tariffs. Upon full implementation of this agreement, 99% of tariff lines of CPTPP parties would become duty-free, covering 98% of Canada's current total exports to these markets.

The benefits of the CPTPP do not stop there, however. In addition to addressing traditional trade policy issues like tariffs and technical barriers to trade, the CPTPP also covers trade in services, investment, intellectual property, government procurement and state-owned enterprises. Companies in my riding, and ridings all across the country, would have access to Asia-Pacific countries that would not exist for countries that have not joined the agreement.

These parts of the agreement serve to provide Canadian companies, service providers and investors alike with transparency, predictability and certainty in their access to CPTPP markets.

For example, the national treatment and most favoured nations provisions combined with a ratchet mechanism would mean that Canadian service providers and investors would have access to CPTPP markets, and these would improve over time as they take steps towards greater liberalization, including when these other partners complete free trade agreement negotiations with other countries around the world. It will mean that the CPTPP would not only open up new markets for Canada today but that our access would improve in the future and over time.

This is complemented by the commitments made on government procurement in the CPTPP, which establish fair, open and transparent rules for competitive procurement markets. Canadian businesses would enjoy equal treatment vis-à-vis domestic suppliers when bidding for government contracts in CPTPP markets. As a result, Canadian suppliers would benefit from new opportunities in markets such as Australia, Brunei, Malaysia and Vietnam, while gaining expanded government procurement access within existing FTA partners like Chile and Peru.

It is now clearer than ever that the CPTPP is a big deal for Canadian businesses and workers. We are making good on our commitment to create opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises and generate economic growth that will benefit all Canadians. This agreement tears down barriers and builds a bridge across the Pacific for Canadian exporters of goods and services.

With the CPTPP, Canada would send a clear signal to the world that it stands firm in its support for the free, rules-based international trading system. In the wake of rising protectionism and sentiments like that around the world, the ratification of the CPTPP would not just secure economic benefits for us today, but also solidify our role in the economic architecture of Asia in the future.

When Canadian companies are given the opportunity to compete on a level playing field, they win. This agreement would extend our playing field to 60% of the global economy. That is the potential for a lot of wins for companies, innovators, those working in trade-related industries, the service sector supporting those industries, those looking to invest in Canada and Canadian companies looking for capital to expand their businesses.

For these reasons our government is committed to ratifying and bringing the CPTPP into force and it is why I encourage hon. members of the House to support the bill before us today.

[Brigitte Sansoucy, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am really worried about the impact of this agreement on the riding that I represent.

There are more than 2,000 farms in Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot. Supply management is a pillar of our economy, not just for dairy producers, but also for processors, schools, laboratories, and research centres. The owner of a downtown clothing store even told me that half his customers are people who work in supply-managed sectors. The entire economy of my riding is affected by every percentage point that is given up. With this agreement, more than 3% is being given up by the dairy sector alone. This will have a direct impact.

I have the following question for my colleague: what do I say to the people who will lose their farms or jobs because of these kinds of international agreements?

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Madam Speaker, I will start by saying that my colleague should not tell the people in her riding that they will lose their farms or jobs, because that is not true.

Naturally, issues arise when we sign any deal with other countries. In this specific case, Canadian standards for farm and agricultural products are much higher. I believe that everyone working on farms in Canada will be proud to have the opportunity to sell their products around the world.

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families]

Madam Speaker, I have been listening to some of the questions from across the way from the NDP. I have to say that I think the only way to get the New Democrats on side with the trade deal is to threaten to rip it up. Then they will go out of their way to protect it. However, until then they are opposed to it. I am wondering if it is not just a perspective we get in Ontario when the New Democrats are adamantly opposed to NAFTA, particularly in the auto sector, and now they all of a sudden think it is the only thing that is going to save the auto sector. Is it a similar response from the part of the country you are from? Are you hearing that CETA and the trade deals with Asia are a threat to a way of life that now need to be protected in order to protect that way of life?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I will not let the member know what I am hearing. However, I would ask the member to address the questions to the Speaker and not to the individual member.

The hon. member for St. John's East.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Madam Speaker, certainly in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador most companies, as my hon. colleague from Avalon has previously indicated, enjoy the fact of improved access to Europe and the United States for our fisheries products, our petrochemical products and our mining resources. It is important to note that these industries support good-paying, unionized, middle-class jobs, the families of the workers, the support services, and the additional enterprise that has undertaken each of these communities where workers in the fisheries sector, the mining sector or the oil and gas sector work. It is a pillar of our economy now that people would have access to international markets. Therefore, it is just not right to engage in the same type of fearmongering that the New Democrats are engaging in now, as she had mentioned, with respect to farms. People on farms should be excited about an opportunity to sell our farming goods and our agricultural products internationally because Canada has the highest standards in the world for our products. We have a great brand, and it is a great opportunity for Canada to leverage its value. Just as Canadian fishers are learning now that brand Canada means a premium for their products overseas, we will find that the same is true for our farming products.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Madam Speaker, the government tells us that it believes it is important to include chapters on gender equity and indigenous peoples in NAFTA negotiations. However, there are no such chapters in the trans-Pacific agreement that we are currently discussing.

Why is it important in NAFTA negotiations, but not in negotiations on the trans-Pacific agreement?

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Madam Speaker, I have also heard the commentary earlier from the parliamentary secretary. There are protections in place either in the agreement itself or in the side letters with each of the individual states that protect indigenous rights and protect women's rights in the labour force. It is a progressive deal. The name of the deal was changed, from the trans-Pacific partnership to the comprehensive and progressive trans-Pacific partnership, to acknowledge that these changes were made at the negotiating table. I believe that she should be happy and not fearful of the outcome.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is great to be back after the summer.

It is with great pleasure I rise today to talk about trade and Bill C-79, which will bring in ratification of the CPTPP.

When we talk about trade, I like to talk about it as real progress for middle-class Canadians. It is a theme our government has mentioned many times and CPTPP, much like CETA, is real progress for middle-class Canadians.

I think about my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge and the folks back there. I think about the Canadian Pacific intermodal facility, which is the busiest intermodal facility in all of Canada, and all the jobs connected to that facility, all the jobs connected from out west and bringing all the products to Vaughan, Ontario and to my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge. I think about CN's MacMillan Yard located in the city of Vaughan, the largest such facility CN Rail has in Canada. I think about the FedEx distribution centre located in my riding and the UPS distribution centre located in the city of Vaughan. I think about the Costco facility located in my riding. I think about all those middle-class Canadians who go to work every day and are dependent on what are called trade dependent jobs. It is important that we think about that and contextualize what CPTPP means. It means jobs for middle-class Canadians.

Before moving to Ontario, I grew up in a place called Prince Rupert, British Columbia. It sometimes astounds me that the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley and the entire NDP caucus would be against trade. The first benefit of increased trade volumes is for those folks doing those longshoring jobs, whether in the port of Prince Rupert, port of Vancouver, port of Halifax or the port of Montreal. Those are great jobs, jobs that pay well over $100,000 a year with great benefits. They are unionized, middle-class jobs. It astounds me that in their interventions today, NDP members would talk about the CPTPP and that all trade is bad for the economy. No, Canada is wealthy because of trade. Our linkages to the outside world are dependent on trade and investment flows.

I look at CETA, which has been ratified by the House and some of the European countries are slowly but incrementally following along. The Globe and Mail reported this week that trade through the port of Montreal is up 20%. If we look at international merchandise trade statistics, which came out for July from StatsCan about a week ago, trade volume is at record levels, led by energy and energy exports. Trade to Italy, France and the Netherlands is up for imports and exports. What does that imply? It implies jobs for middle-class Canadians. I always take it back to that because I know when I go back to my riding, the individuals I speak to want to have a good future for themselves and their children.

Economic growth for Canada is very important to me. Economic growth for Canada translating into good middle-class jobs is very important to me. When I visit the Home Depot distribution centre on a tour, I see all those lovely folks working very hard bringing in products from all over the world. I did a tour of the CP intermodal facility with CP's management and saw how it is. I personally worked at a grain elevator growing up. The ships would come in and we would bring in that beautiful western Canadian barley, wheat and canola to be shipped out of the port of Prince Rupert to go to export markets. That is what we are talking about, and those are the issues I am proud to be fighting for here in the House of Commons.

CETA is a progressive trade deal. The first question I ask myself is how CPTPP aligns with Canada's progressive trade agenda. Does it align with our labour rights and environmental regulations? I think the answer is yes. Does it align with social responsibility? I think the answer is yes. Does it grow our $2-trillion economy that many Canadians contribute to day in and day out? The answer is yes.

Now, we know with trade sometimes there are winners and sometimes there are losers. We need to make sure the winners do well and we need to make sure anybody impacted also receives a little help. However, I would argue that trade rises all boats and when done properly, the benefits are enormous. We see that with CETA these days. Over 9,000 products come in tariff-free now to Canada and vice versa, benefits from procurement.

There is another angle that needs to be added: the entrepreneurial spirit that Canadians have from coast to coast to coast. In the city of Vaughan, there are over 13,000 small and medium enterprises. Those companies compete domestically and internationally, and CPTPP opens up new, exciting markets, including in Japan, Australia, and a bunch of other countries. I think there are eight or nine more.

We can look at where our economy is today and how we are making real progress for middle-class Canadians, whether it is through the Canada child benefit or the tax cuts for nine million Canadians. When we think about it holistically, trade fits into the picture, and we need to keep pushing that needle forward.

In today's world where sometimes doors are being closed rather than opened and where countries are maybe too myopic and do not look at the big picture, Canada needs to remain at the forefront of pushing for liberalized trade markets and for a liberalized investment agenda to allow people to invest.

I look at our immigration policy with regard to high-skilled workers. I note that over 10,000 workers came into Canada because our government brought in a change that allows the best and brightest to come here sometimes within two weeks. That is why when we sign the CPTPP, it is so important that we connect with the rest of the world.

When I look at the progressivity of this trade deal with regard to corporate social responsibility, cultural identity and diversity, environmental protection, gender equality, indigenous rights, labour rights, inclusive trade and sustainable development, I ask myself if it does all that. The answer is yes.

I ask myself the same thing when I think about the auto sector. In Ontario, the auto sector is very important. In the city of Vaughan, we are blessed to have the headquarters of Martinrea. In the York region, we have the headquarters of Magna, which is one of the top two largest auto parts providers in the world, with over 50 plants in Ontario and operations in Europe, Asia, the United States and Mexico. This is a trade deal that opens up markets for us and allows companies, such as Martinrea and Magna, to compete to provide those services to tier one OEMs, as we like to call them.

If we look at the revised CPTPP versus the other one, it is clear our government sat down at the negotiating table and negotiated a better agreement. I will read a short comment:

To provide market access for Canadian auto exports to Japan, Canada reached an agreement on auto standards with Japan that brings into effect important commitments on automotive standards and regulations that Japan made to the United States and Canada in the original TPP, but which Canada lost when the United States withdrew from the TPP. Canada also secured a most favoured nation clause on auto standards in a side agreement with Japan to capture future liberalization that Japan would make in this area. The CPTPP would ensure that treatment of Canadian autos are not disadvantaged compared to autos of other countries. Moreover, Canada concluded an autos’ rules-of-origin side letter with Malaysia to allow the Canadian auto sector to benefit from preferential tariff treatment...

Our negotiators, who are the best in the world, negotiated a better agreement, one that I hate to tell the opposition is better than the one that party negotiated. It is the truth.

I always talk about real progress for Canada's middle class, but let us remove the words “middle class”. How about just real progress for Canada's farmers and fishermen? On the east coast, we have seen lobster exports to Europe explode. On a recent family vacation to Boston, I had a conversation with someone who said that their fisherfolks would love to have access to Europe like our Canadian fisherfolks do. I grew up in Prince Rupert, British Columbia, which has canneries. I cleaned fish to pay for university. We have increased access for fisherfolks, loggers, and western Canadian farmers who farm grain, beef and other meats. We need to support them. That is what CPTPP does. They want us there and they want this agreement signed.

I look forward to swift ratification of this agreement.

It is good for our economy, it is good for the middle class, and it is good for Canada's economic growth. In my opinion, it is very good for the future of my children and children across the country.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. In closing, he said that it was important to the well-being of his children that Canada have agreements that allow each of our regions to prosper, so that they too can benefit from these agreements and grow. I thank him for presenting that approach. Obviously, leaving our children with major deficits will not do much to help them prosper, but that is not what we are talking about today. We are talking about the importance of signing the CPTPP as quickly as possible.

Could my colleague tell us why his government did not support the initiative of our leader, the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, when we invited the Liberal government to take action in July by recalling the House to quickly ratify the CPTPP? It is not enough to repeat that it is urgent. The Liberals need to walk the talk. Unfortunately, when the Liberals had the opportunity to do so, they turned their backs and dismissed the proposal to recall the House in July when we, on this side of the House, were willing to sit.

Could my colleague explain his government's decision in that regard?

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member from Quebec for his question.

For the CPTPP to enter into force, six countries, six signatories are needed and then it comes into force 60 days after. Even at that time in July there were not six signatories yet. I stand to be corrected, but having looked at it this morning, I believe that is correct.

If one looks at our progress on the trade file with regard to CETA and the negotiations in Latin America and Central America, we are making progress on several fronts with those countries to increase trade volumes here in Canada and create those good middle-class jobs.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, in his speech, my Liberal friend did go over the fact that there are certain sectors in Canada's agriculture area that would benefit, but supply managed sectors will be hurt. As much as the Liberals like to stand in the House time and time again, I have quotes from the Dairy Farmers of Canada, the Chicken Farmers of Canada, and the Egg Farmers of Canada, who are all unanimously against this deal.

I would like my friend and colleague to explain to the House the discrepancy between what the Liberals say and how their actions match up, especially in light of the fact that the most important stakeholders in supply management are united against the government's plan under the CPTPP.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, on the CPTPP, if we look at the overall benefits to the Canadian economy, they are quite significant and quite material. As a country, we need to always be pushing forward our trade agenda. We must be opening new markets for stakeholders from coast to coast to coast.

We could look at a trade deal and have five folks screaming that it is great and other folks maybe not. What is important is that we consult with those stakeholders, sit down with them and ensure that the benefits are known to all stakeholders and all Canadians and that we understand a trade agenda like NAFTA, CETA, and CPTPP is important to continue to grow our economy.

[Kim Rudd, Liberal, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Madam Speaker, my colleague made a very impassioned and articulate speech.

In my riding of Northumberland—Peterborough South we have an amazing company called Team Eagle. It is the world's most comprehensive airfield products and services company in the world. It does trade with 100 companies. Ninety per cent of our Canadian canola product is exported to 50 countries. Could the member talk about the importance of the diversification of our trade, going from airfield products to canola and everything in between?

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague from Northumberland—Peterborough South is a great long-time friend of mine.

I completely agree with you. Seventy-five per cent of our exports are to our great friend and neighbour, the United States. We must continue to ensure we are on the path to further trade diversification. It is a pillar of our economy and a pillar of our government. It is great for our economy and it creates great middle-class jobs.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I want to remind the member he is to address the questions and comments to the Chair and not an individual member.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Madam Speaker, I am always pleased to rise in the House to bring forward the views of my constituents. I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Don Valley East.

First, this trade deal has been extremely important deal for Canadians. It is an extremely important deal for all 11 countries, but I will show throughout my speech how the CPTPP will benefit Canadians.

A simple way to talk about trade is if we trade a car. It would be an even one-for-one trade, with one item traded. There are all kinds of trades in which multiple items are traded and we agree on certain prices for trading back and forth. Then there are large trade deals that affect many industries and many resources.

This trade deal is extremely important to Canadians. It would benefit Canada's middle class, including the people in my riding of Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, as I will explain as I move forward.

When we talk about trade, it is about the elimination of tariffs and taxes. That can only benefit people, and that is what it is all about. Canada is a country that is rich in resources. If anyone can compete and trade in resources or services, this is the nation that can do it.

We are talking about having access to more products and a more competitive price. In general, half a billion people will be involved in this trade deal. We are opening up our markets to half a billion people, but we will have access to a market of half a billion people as well. It is very positive. We will have access and exports for middle-class Canadians.

That is 11 countries, half a billion people, and this deal affects 13.5% of the GDP for Canada and the 10 countries signing this agreement. This is quite impressive. It is almost 15% of the GDP worldwide, which is extremely impressive. If we take some samples, in 2016, Canada and the 10 countries had about $100 billion in trade. By adding this agreement now, the CPTPP, we are not only going to increase that in many sectors, but for Canada next year it means $4.2 billion in GDP. Think about that. It is $4.2 billion. It is an enormous amount of money to be had.

We are going to talk about many sectors. There is the financial sector, the fish and seafood sector, agriculture and agri-food, and metals and minerals, etc. As I said earlier, if any country can compete, it is Canada, because we are very rich in natural resources.

Because I am from Atlantic Canada, we need to talk about Atlantic Canadians and the fish and seafood industry there. One hundred per cent of the tariffs would be removed. Think about that. Between Canada and the 10 other countries, for half a billion people, the taxes and tariffs will be removed. For frozen snow crab in Japan, 4% of the tariffs will be eliminated. Then there is the lobster industry. In my riding of Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, in Eastern Passage we have a great company that is growing. It is called Capital Seafood. This will benefit it as well.

Japan and New Zealand would take a 5% elimination of tax and tariffs. There will be no tariffs. They will drop that 5%. Malaysia will eliminate its 8% tariff. Vietnam, over three years, will eliminate its 34% tariff. This is going to be a major advantage to our seafood industry in Canada, and especially for the lobster industry in Atlantic Canada.

Both the Atlantic and Pacific salmon industries in Canada will benefit. How much are we going to eliminate? Of course, the tariffs will be eliminated. We are going to have 18% elimination in Vietnam, enormous sums. In Japan, tariffs will be reduced 3.5% over the next 10 years. In Vietnam, tariffs on frozen fish will be reduced to zero. The 18% tariff will be eliminated. In Japan it will be 10% over 10 years.

My colleague from Malpeque mentioned the fabulous oysters in P.E.I. We have fabulous oysters in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick as well. We are going to see the elimination of those tariffs in Japan, which represents 10.5%.

Those are enormous benefits that we will be seeing in not just the seafood industry but in many sectors across our country.

There are big advantages to signing on early. Three countries have ratified the agreement, and Canada hopes to be the fourth. As my colleague said earlier, there is a minimum of six countries, and we want to be among the first six.

When we are among the first to sign, we can do something that others cannot do, and that is to give it what I call a Canadian flavour. That is what we were able to do with the changes in the last two years following our consultations. We were able to bring forward some labour rights, ensuring some improvements in that area. We were also able to bring forward some safety rights and environmental rights, as well as the protection of intellectual property, technology, etc. These are important areas to Canadians, and we also committed to indigenous people and their rights.

We were able to influence because we were early. We were part of creating the CPTPP and what it is all about. That is a big advantage. Being first is also a big advantage for our industries because we get to establish ourselves. We get to put down our footprint. We are able to get our branding in. When other countries follow, they will have to compete with the best, and that is always more challenging. That is why Canadians will benefit greatly. When the Americans choose to join, they will have to compete like the rest of the countries as well.

This is an important deal for Canadians. It continues the work of our Liberal government. Our government signed off on CETA last year, where we saw the elimination of 98% of tariffs, compared to 25% prior to that deal. An enormous amount of money will be saved. Middle-class Canadians will benefit through jobs. They will benefit as consumers, because they will have access to products. It will be a win-win situation.

Canada is the only country to have a free trade agreement with all G7 nations. Canada is the only country to have a free trade agreement with the Americas, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. That is pretty impressive when we think about all of the countries in the world. Canada is not only a major player but a leader as well.

This agreement would also allow us to be less dependent on certain countries, such as the U.S.A., of course. We love Americans and we want to work closely with them. We invite them to sign off on the NAFTA deal as soon as possible and join us here, because together it will be much better.

I have to finish by sharing a quote from Pierre Gratton, the president and CEO of the Mining Association of Canada, who said, “We can't afford to be outside of this trading bloc. ... It would put us at a huge disadvantage.”

As I have indicated in my remarks this afternoon, middle-class Canadians will have many opportunities for better-paying jobs through this deal, and they will benefit from having access to products at a good price.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Madam Speaker, this summer I had the privilege of having the member for Niagara West, the shadow minister for international trade diversification, in my riding. We held a round table in my riding with a number of small business owners and manufacturers. They had some major concerns around many issues: lack of clarity on tariffs; increased government regulation and red tape; increased taxes and the impending carbon tax. However, one of their main concerns was the TPP.

In June, we had the privilege of encouraging the current government to pass the TPP before we left for the summer. There was nothing.

During the summer we said, “Let's meet and get the TPP passed and implemented so that it will start to benefit our trade with our trading partners.” Again there was silence.

My question is this. Today I heard the quote many times about the government being impassioned about this, being enthusiastic about this TPP, yet here we are, months past when we could have passed it. I would like to ask my colleague why there has been this delay. Is it really the fact that the Liberals are so impassioned, or are they finally recognizing that the Conservatives had it right all along and we should have passed it in June?

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Madam Speaker, one thing our government is doing that is much different from the former Conservative government is that we consult with Canadians. We consult to make sure that we can put strategies and principles in place to ensure a much more level playing field. That is what this agreement does.

The member must keep in mind that at least six countries must sign on for this to come into effect, and only three have signed on already. We will hopefully be the fourth one, so there has been absolutely no delay. We have been hard at work in our constituencies throughout the summer listening to middle-class Canadians so that we are able to bring forward good decisions for middle-class Canadians.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am not even sure where to begin to bust apart the myths and the misinformation we just heard coming from the other side. However, I will attempt it.

First, the member mentioned CETA. Stats Canada came out and said that our trade since signing on to CETA has declined, that Canadian exports are lower than where they were a year ago before signing on to this agreement. Therefore, the benefits for Canadians are not there. The tanker traffic has increased simply because we have so many imports coming into our country from Europe.

A second point is about labour. I want to let the member know that in the original TPP, the U.S. negotiated some advances with respect to labour. There was a 12-page labour reform plan to allow Vietnamese workers to have free and independent collective bargaining. Canada could not even secure this same commitment and let it go.

In terms of labour as well, under President Obama there were labour consistency plans that were struck with Malaysia and Brunei in an effort to have both countries live up to fundamental labour standards. Again, that is gone with Canada sitting at the negotiating table by itself.

Last, there is the progressive piece. There is no gender chapter, no indigenous persons chapter, and no mention of climate change whatsoever.

If the Liberals are sticking up for the middle class, my question to the member—through you, Madam Speaker—is this: What does he say to the 58,000 manufacturing workers and supply-managed farmers who today are very afraid about losing their livelihood?

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Madam Speaker, it is a very simple formula. When we are able to open up markets with countries and with the business community across the world of half a billion people and we are able to reduce or eliminate tariffs as we see in this agreement, the solution is very simple: The growth will be tremendous. As I said in my speech, we are going to see a $4.2-billion GDP increase in one year. Those are major improvements.

I understand, as my colleague said earlier: The NDP hate it because they did not do it. If they had the opportunity to do it, then of course they would be talking positively about it.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Because we would do it right.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Madam Speaker, instead of trying to break everything apart, the NDP should be helping us to make it better. That is why we are moving forward and we will get it done. Every middle-class Canadian will benefit from this very shortly.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I want to remind the member for Essex that when someone has the floor, she needs to allow that person to speak without being interrupted.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Don Valley East.