House of Commons Hansard #433 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was debate.

Topics

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

I would just remind the hon. minister and other members to direct their comments to the Chair.

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals like to think of themselves as different from the Conservatives.

I will concede this point, that much of the legislation and many of the laws that were passed under the Harper government were repulsive. The Harper government did in fact gut environmental laws. There is no question about that.

However, that being said, the Liberal government also promised it would do things differently. The Liberals said that they would not bring in omnibus bills. What have they done? They have brought in omnibus. They said they would not bring in closure. What have they done? They have brought in closure.

If the Liberal government wants to say that it is different from the former Conservative government, will it stop bringing in closure?

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC

Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated on a couple of different occasions, the bill has gone through extensive debate, both in this chamber and in the other House.

It went through three days of debate during second reading. It went through eight days of committee meetings, including hearing almost 50 witnesses. It went through four days at report stage. It is going through three days of debate presently. In the other House, it went through nine days of discussions during second reading, 10 committee meetings and three days of discussions during third reading. That is a total of 39 days. This is important.

I would just reflect on the fact that on Tuesday, the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands emphasized how important it was for fish and fish habitat that the bill pass in this session.

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Mr. Speaker, this is the pot calling the kettle black. It is shameful that the government is bringing out all its Atlantic MPs to stand up for the east coast and for the fisheries out there, when during the corrupt surf clam decision, not one of them said a single word. Not one of them stood up for Grand Bank. Not one of them stood up for our friend Edgar, who was at risk of losing his job. There was not one peep from any of the Atlantic Canada MPs.

I hope that Atlantic Canadians are listening in right now, because the only people who are standing up for them are the Conservatives in the opposition.

I will ask our hon. colleague this question one more time. Can he prove, and table with this House, any examples of where the changes to the 2012 Fisheries Act resulted in any harmful alteration or disruption or destruction of fish or fish habitat?

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

June 13th, 2019 / 11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for raising the issue of Atlantic Canada. Atlantic Canadians understand that an important fishery is one in which we make investments and one we manage properly. There is enormous support among fish harvesters. I invite the member to go and actually talk to fish harvesters, who are for this legislation, for strengthening owner-operators, for the investments in stock rebuilding and for investments in science. This harvester is no better than anyone else in this country. The devastating cuts to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans that happened under the watch of the members opposite—

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Order. Shouting across the aisle is not permitted. One member has been recognized to speak in the House.

I would ask the hon. Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to wrap up in five or six seconds, and then we will get going with the question.

The hon. minister.

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC

Mr. Speaker, Atlantic Canadians know, better than any other folks, how important this legislation is and how important rebuilding the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has been. We expect that they will reflect on that when they make their choice in 2019.

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

I want to compliment hon. members, by the way, for keeping their interventions very succinct. We got in almost 20 questions in a 30-minute round, so that is very good.

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings at this time and put forthwith the question on the motion now before the House.

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

All those opposed will please say nay.

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Bill C-68—Time Allocation MotionFisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #1355

Fisheries ActGovernment Orders

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

I declare the motion carried.

Bill C-100—Time Allocation MotionCanada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

11:55 a.m.

Waterloo Ontario

Liberal

Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

moved:

That, in relation to Bill C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican States, not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the Bill; and

That, at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration of the second reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

Bill C-100—Time Allocation MotionCanada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

Noon

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Pursuant to Standing Order 67.1, there will now be a 30-minute period for questions.

I invite hon. members who wish to ask questions to rise in their places so the Chair will have some idea of the number of members who wish to participate in this question period.

I would also ask hon. members to keep their interventions to approximately one minute. In this 30-minute question period, questions by members of the opposition are given preference, but the government side may ask a few questions as well.

Bill C-100—Time Allocation MotionCanada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

Noon

Conservative

Dean Allison Conservative Niagara West, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals said they would do things differently, that they would not bring in closure and that they would not rush debate, yet here they are, breaking a promise they made in the last election campaign.

The Liberals indicated to us that they did not want to move too far ahead of the U.S. in terms of ratification, but how are they going to move in tandem with the U.S.? They want to make sure we are lockstep with the Americans, but we have heard on numerous occasions that the Democrats are not really prepared to move this forward.

Do the Liberals plan on bringing the House back this summer in order to ratify this agreement before the next election?

Bill C-100—Time Allocation MotionCanada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

Noon

Waterloo Ontario

Liberal

Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, as has been made quite clear, we will be moving in tandem with both the United States and Mexico. They have commenced the ratification process, and that is why it is important that we advance this important legislation to committee so that members can have the opportunity to discuss it.

We have been able to find a good deal that is a win-win-win. We want to ensure that the Canadian economy has certainty, along with our supply chains and businesses.

To directly respond to the member's question, yes, we will do so if necessary. We have limited tools, but recalling the House would be one of them. I have stated on the public record, both within the House and outside, that I would be more than willing to recall the House to ensure that both the Canadian economy and Canadians themselves have certainty, and that we are able to ratify this deal.

Bill C-100—Time Allocation MotionCanada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

Noon

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

Mr. Speaker, this is just really incomprehensible at this point. We are talking about the largest trading relationship we have and millions of jobs in our country, but we are not going to be able to have a proper debate on this agreement.

In response to a question I asked one day in the House, the Prime Minister said the bill would have a full debate in the House, yet here we are. The Liberals are using the undemocratic tools of the Harper Conservatives and ramming through legislation.

This piece of legislation, of all pieces of legislation, deserves to have the full amount of time. Rushing this through would not benefit Canadians in any way. The agreement would increase the cost of medication and jeopardize jobs.

Why have the Liberals been so dishonest? Why are they putting working people in jeopardy by ramming through this legislation?

Bill C-100—Time Allocation MotionCanada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to this important legislation, we have actually been able to strike a really good balance that works for Canadian industry sectors and for Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

There is not a single deal that the NDP would ever support, because its members do not believe in free trade, and that is just their position. They say they want to discuss this; the member says she would like to discuss this, but she would rather discuss this legislation at the expense of people directly within her riding.

She says she supports the auto sector. Let us hear some quotes.

David Adams, president of Global Automakers of Canada, said on October 2, 2018 that CUSMA exempts a percentage of eligible auto exports from tariffs, and that it is one of the biggest wins in the new deal.

Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association, said that Windsor is perfectly positioned to take advantage of the new agreement. He pointed out that manufacturers now have to source 75% instead of 62.5% of the content in North America, and that that volume will show up undeniably in places like Windsor.

I would hope that the member would support this important legislation and see it go to committee.

Bill C-100—Time Allocation MotionCanada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:05 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Mr. Speaker, while Conservatives support stability, let me point out that we have heard the government say before that everything is fine.

The Mexican government met with the Americans to discuss trilateral issues that they originally said were all bilateral. By the time the Liberal government had woken up, smelled the coffee and realized it had been played, it ended up getting handed a NAFTA 0.5, which is this agreement that is now being referred to as CUSMA.

The Government House Leader has said that she heard specifically that the Canadian process will be in tandem with the American process. The Liberal government has been played before. What evidence does the Government House Leader have from either Congress or the administration that the government will not be played again?

Bill C-100—Time Allocation MotionCanada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the legislation and this deal, we have not been played. The only members playing games are the Conservatives. Their only plan when it comes to trade deals is to capitulate. I would encourage them to find a better plan, because as we saw under 10 years of Stephen Harper, they were not able to get deals signed. The member knows this very well. They were able to get within two inches of the end zone, but they never moved into the end zone, and those points just do not count.

We now have trade deals with every other G7 country, but I will provide the member another assurance. We have always said we will move in tandem with our partners to the extent possible, and Mexico is moving forward. On June 11, 2019, Mexico's Senate held the first of two days of hearings on CUSMA. Senators met again on June 12. The full Mexican Senate is likely to meet on June 17 and 18 to continue the process.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs is in close contact with Mexico and the United States. She spoke with Secretary Pompeo and U.S. trade representative Ambassador Lighthizer yesterday. She spoke with the Mexican foreign minister as well, on June 10.

Our government is working in tandem with others, as I have said. These are some concrete examples that should provide the member with some reassurance.