Debates of Sept. 17th, 2018

Question No. 1870

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

With regard to Infrastructure Canada: what are the expenditures, since November 4, 2015, for the Minister’s exempt staff to travel to Edmonton, broken down by (i) name of exempt staff member, (ii) title of exempt staff member, (iii) date of arrival in Edmonton, (iv) date of departure from Edmonton, (v) travel expenditure, (vi) accommodation, (vii) per diem, (viii) incidentals?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 1873

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

With regard to government funding in the constituency of Vancouver Kingsway: what is the total amount of funding, including the department or agency, the initiative and the amount, broken down by each fiscal year from 2015 to 2018?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 1875

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

With regard to the Joint Support Ship Procurement (previously called ALSC): (a) since the program’s inception in 1993, what are, broken down by fiscal year, the (i) program costs, (ii) major Crown project office costs, (iii) the technical services sub-contracts; (b) what steps have the government taken to ensure that the program remains on time and on budget as promised in previous reports to Parliament, since the inception of the National Shipbuilding Strategy to present and, if steps have been taken, what are the details of such step, broken down by individual step; (c) has the Royal Canadian Navy, the Department of National Defence, the Department of Finance or the Privy Council Office received any warnings or concerns of the risks to cutting steel for only the bow section of the Joint Support Ships so early in the project, with ship delivery at least five years away and, if so, (i) what is the highest ranking official who received the warning and, if so, on what date, (ii) did the Minister receive the warning and, if so, on what date; (d) has the government received any internal or third party analysis of risks (budgetary, schedule, employment, construction or management) related to Seaspan’s construction of the Off-Shore Science Fisheries Vessels, the Off-Shore Oceanographic Vessels, the Joint Support Ships and the polar class icebreaker in 2015, 2016, 2017 or 2018 and, if so, what are the details of such reports, including (i) author, (ii) findings, (iii) date report was finalized; and (e) what are the details of any briefing notes, emails or reports prepared in relation to the Joint Support Ship program, since January 1, 2018, including (i) date, (ii) sender, (iii) recipient, (iv) title or subject matter, (v) summary, (vi) file number?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 1877

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

With regard to expenditures related to the Canada 2020 Annual Conference in June 2018, including tickets, conference fees, sponsorship and other expenses, and broken down by department, agency, Crown corporation or other government entity: (a) what are the details of all expenses, including (i) amount, (ii) description of goods or services; and (b) for all tickets or conference fees purchased, (i) who attended the event, (ii) what was the number of tickets, (iii) what was the amount per ticket?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 1879

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

With regard to the Oceans Protection Plan (OPP) announced by the government on November 7, 2016: (a) what is the total amount of OPP funds disbursed to date; and (b) what are the details of each project or organization funded by the OPP, including (i) recipient, (ii) location, (iii) date of announcement, (iv) amount received to date, (v) project description or purpose of funding, (vi) duration of project?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 1880

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

With regard to the Minister of Health: (a) what are the details of all memorandums or briefing notes on the front of package regulations, including (i) date, (ii) sender, (iii) recipient, (iv) title, (v) summary, (vi) file number, (vii) position on front of package proposal (i.e. supportive or opposed); (b) what are the peer-reviewed scientific studies and analyses used in the consideration of the proposed regulation, broken down by (i) title of article, (ii) date of publication, (iii) author; (c) what does the government estimate the annual cost for the next two, five and ten years to the industry to implement these changes, broken down by sector, including (i) primary agriculture, (ii) meat processors, (iii) seafood processors, (iv) dairy producers, (v) chicken farmers and processors, (vi) turkey farmers and producers, (vii) corn farmers and producers, (viii) soy farmers and producers (ix) sugar beat farmers and producers; (d) by what percentage in the next five, ten, twenty and forty years is the government expecting a reduction of 2018 rates of the following health concerns due to front of package labelling, (i) heart disease, (ii) obesity rates, (iii) diabetes, (iv) cancers; and (e) what are the details of all correspondence by foreign government on front of package labelling, broken down by (i) date, (ii) sender, (iii) recipient, (iv) title, (v) summary, (vi) file number (vii) position on front of package proposal (i.e. supportive or opposed)?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker, Geoff Regan]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that 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, be read the second time and referred to a committee, and of the amendment.

Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation Act

[The Speaker, Geoff Regan]

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade Diversification has five and a half minutes remaining in his comments.

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade Diversification]

Mr. Speaker, I spent the majority of my speech talking about the immediate positive impact that the CPTPP would have on our economy and its potential for economic growth and job creation, as well as giving access to an incredibly large and dynamic market and access to a dynamic and a vibrant region. I talked about access to our small and medium-sized enterprises. I also talked about the ambitious standards that this new agreement set out, the improvements that our government had introduced to the previous version of the TPP and the number of jobs, middle-class jobs that it would create.

Let me spend the last couple of minutes of my speech talking about the potential, beyond the immediate impact, that this agreement will have.

These benefits for Canada are only set to grow further with the potential expansion of the CPTPP after it enters into force. A number of economies across the region have already informed us of their interest in joining the CPTPP by way of accession in the near future. ln fact, any economy that is able to meet the high standards and ambitious market access commitments of the CPTPP will be able to seek accession to the agreement after entry into force. This means even greater opportunities for Canada even after we implement and ratify the CPTPP as its membership continues to grow, which is why Canada welcomes the interest of several economies in acceding to the agreement.

Through the accession process, the CPTPP will become a vehicle for Canada to advance our economic and commercial interests with some of the world's fastest-growing economies, while setting a new standard for trade agreements in the Asia Pacific region. That is to say, the CPTPP is the beginning of a new chapter in Canadian trade relations, as we seek new markets and diversify our trade. We can be excited about embarking on this new chapter together, as we continue to open new markets and opportunities for Canadian businesses, workers, and consumers, and ensure that benefits of trade can be felt in all parts of the country.

lt is clear that this agreement provides the tools for Canadian industries to connect with more economies internationally and expand beyond the shores of the continent. That is why I call on all my colleagues to implement the CPTPP expeditiously.

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

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to ask my hon. colleague a question. At the end of his speech, he talked about passing the comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans-Pacific partnership as quickly as possible, which is a very important aspect of today's debate.

I have attended a number of press conferences and events at which farmers collectively called on the Liberal government to hurry up and ratify the CPTPP. All of our farmers have an interest in Canada being among the first six countries at the CPTPP table. If we are not, the first six countries will be served and Canada will be stuck with the leftovers.

However, this summer, the Liberal government refused our leader's invitation to hold a special sitting to quickly ratify the CPTPP.

Instead of talking and talking about how urgent it is, why did the Liberals not take action this summer to make sure that Canada was among the first six countries to ratify the CPTPP?

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his support for the ratification of the CPTPP. We agree that the CPTPP is an important agreement for Canada and for Canadians and we are anxious to get it passed as quickly as possible. He also knows that to expedite any bill beyond normal parliamentary procedure would require unanimous consent in the House and he knows that it is not possible, unfortunately, to get that unanimous consent in the House.

With that having been said, the minister, the Prime Minister and all my colleagues here are committed to working with colleagues in other parties and passing the bill as quickly as possible to ensure Canadians benefit. We remain committed to being one of the first six countries to ratify the CPTPP.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Madam Speaker, I welcome the parliamentary secretary to his new role and look forward to working with him on the international trade file in my role as critic for the NDP.

The trade committee did an exhaustive study, with 400 witnesses and a cross-country tour. I would encourage the parliamentary secretary to read that report, as well as the 60,000 letters Canadians wrote to the trade committee, 95% of which opposed the TPP.

He raised something that was very important, and that is the economic impact. I would also encourage him to read Global Affairs' own impact analysis, which shows conclusively that there is not much economic benefit for Canadians, but there is a risk to jobs. That is acknowledged by Global Affairs.

Economically, there would be a gain of $4.2 billion over a period of 22 years. Ironically, this is about the amount that Canada trades every single day. The economic impact of this agreement has been challenged, not just by the government itself but the Canada West Foundation. It found that the deal would lead to a .082% increase in Canadian GDP by 2035, and this represents a one-time increase after 15 years, not an annual increase. I would encourage the parliamentary secretary to read that.

Could he let us know whether he thinks sacrificing 58,000 jobs is worth this trade agreement?

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her welcoming remarks and I too look forward to working with her and my colleagues on the international trade committee.

She referred to the exhaustive consultations that our government embarked on in the previous version of the TPP. Our government listened to all the stakeholders who came forward and offered their input. That is why, after a couple of years of consultation, we are proud that Canada has been the strongest voice among the 11 countries to improve the previous version of the TPP. We have protected a lot of the concerns that stakeholders raised in the previous version of the TPP and we are proud of this new version.

Canadians may not be surprised when they hear that the NDP oppose a trade agreement. It is not uncommon for us to hear the NDP speak with fear about what free trade may cause. However, history has proven that Canada depends on international trade. Our economy continues to grow, and it is clear to us that we need to also diversify our access to markets.

Yes, North America is an important market for us, but we are helping our businesses and consumers access brand new markets that are dynamic, that are growing. This will lead to the creation of new jobs and economic growth for Canadians and Canada.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Madam Speaker, I hope my colleague's speech will encourage the ratification of the CPTPP.

I want to ask him a question about the benefits to the middle class and those working hard to join it. I will add to that by talking about what the CETA agreement did for businesses in my riding. Ocean Choice International is a fish processing company that exports almost 100 million pounds of fish to 35 different countries. It told me that the CETA agreement made a big difference to it in accessing those markets and opening doors. That business creates hundreds of middle-class jobs.

Could the member comment on what this agreement will do in creating middle-class jobs and those working hard to join it?

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is true that we just celebrated the first anniversary of the ratification of CETA and we have already witnessed significant economic growth. CETA has benefited our workers and businesses. Recently in The Globe and Mail there was a report about a 20% increase in traffic at the port of Montreal mainly due to CETA. We have also heard so many stories, like my hon. colleague's, of businesses in our own ridings that have been benefiting from CETA.

I want to assure my hon. colleague that we expect to see similar growth. Asia has the fastest growing middle class. Therefore, it is now to the benefit of our businesses to have access to that fastest growing middle class. It will also help our workers and businesses. That is precisely why we made sure that we protected high standards of employment and high standards for the environment within the CPTPP to benefit everyone.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Madam Speaker, I would like to welcome the parliamentary secretary to the trade committee. I look forward to working with him as we look at other trade files.

I am happy to see the CPTPP, or I will call it TPP, actually coming forward. This has been a frustrating file for me. It should have come forward three years ago and should have been signed. It would have been approved by Obama, it would have been approved in Mexico and we would not have the issues we face today with NAFTA. The TPP at the time was to replace NAFTA; it was the modernization of NAFTA.

Now companies, farmers and agriculture producers in western Canada are very excited about the TPP moving forward. They are very keen to see this happen. In fact, they wanted to see this happen last spring. They would have preferred to have that come forward versus marijuana legislation so they could take advantage of being the first movers in this agreement. However, we are here today doing what we have to do, and we will get it done. I am happy to say that it looks like it is finally going to get done this fall.

I am also very concerned. As we open up new markets for Canadian manufacturers, we have done nothing at home to make them more competitive to ensure they can actually compete in the markets we are opening for them. All the Liberals have done is taxed and over-regulated them. What is the parliamentary secretary going to do within the Liberal Party to change that?