Debates of Oct. 23rd, 2023

Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, 2023

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague on the potential for co-operation on cybersecurity. Cybersecurity, as we all know, is becoming as big a threat as the physical security of borders. Canada has some expertise in cybersecurity and Ukraine also has good expertise in cyber-related knowledge. In fact, we have heard reports of Ukrainians domestically developing technologies and using them to develop drones to counter attacks from Russia. I am sure that expertise that is available in both these countries can join hands to develop new levels of cybersecurity protocols.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, as this is my first chance to comment on Bill C-57, I would put this question to my friend from Nepean.

It is heartening to see some reference to climate in trade agreements, but we know that for over more than a decade, since the creation of the World Trade Organization, the WTO has wrongly put itself above international climate agreements with respect to its authorities. I think this is a welcome opportunity, as President Zelenskyy is a champion of the call for climate action.

Would the hon. member for Nepean support a call to the hon. Minister of Trade to review the relationship between the WTO and international climate agreements in order to get the WTO to back off on interfering in climate action?

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, the collaborative efforts to develop green technologies and renewable sources will contribute to a sustainable and environmentally responsible future. That is what we have said with this agreement. I am sure the trade minister in future negotiations with the WTO will certainly bring up the climate-related issues that can also be part of future WTO agreements.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Speaker, today I rise to speak to Bill C-57. I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman.

With more than a million Canadians who have Ukrainian heritage, I think it is important not only that we have shown our support for Ukraine in the past, but also, certainly, with what is going on with Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine, that we show it now and into the future. Ukrainian immigrants, more than 100 years ago, literally broke ground and planted the roots for Canada's thriving and vibrant agriculture industry in western Canada, so the connections are deep.

However, when it comes to this agreement in particular, I want to emphasize the importance of due diligence and details. The Liberals have tabled a 600-page trade document that is now being rushed through the House of Commons with little opportunity for stakeholders or parliamentarians to review its intricacies. What chapters have been added? What new implements have been suggested? What are the consequences of those new chapters and new policies? When it comes to the Liberal government and its history with trade agreements, the devil is in the details.

To back up a bit, the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement began under the Harper Conservative government. It came into force in August 2017. It eliminated tariffs on 86% of Canadian products and exports to Ukraine. However, the modernization of this agreement is important, and I want to emphasize the fact that we want to see the details and take time to review the wording of the new update. The reason I want to be so adamant about that is just simply that, as I said, unfortunately the Liberal government has a history of failures when it comes negotiating or renegotiating trade agreements. We can go back to the very early days of the Liberal government when we renegotiated NAFTA or the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Trade Agreement, CUSMA. It was clear that the Liberals' goal was to simply get a deal done, tick a box and have a photo-op.

The Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister sacrificed a number of critical Canadian industries with trade discrepancies that Canadian industries are still dealing with. Perhaps nowhere were those implications more profound than within Canadian agriculture. The CUSMA agreement impacted a number of agriculture industries, including dairy, where Canada relinquished its ability to export a number of important dairy products, like protein concentrate and skim milk powder. We also added additional access for American products into Canada.

The most glaring error, though perhaps it was not an error but was done on purpose, is the fact that the Liberal government relinquished Canada's trade sovereignty in signing the new CUSMA agreement. That is right. If Canada wants to sign a new trade agreement with any non-market country, we have to get permission or approval from the United States. No G7 country had relinquished that kind of authority to a trading partner. That had never happened, but it is exactly what happened with the Liberals' agreement with CUSMA. Our manufacturers and industry are still dealing with the implications of this agreement, with higher tariffs on aluminum and softwood lumber, which still have not been resolved years later.

There are clearly some important reasons Canadian manufacturers and Canadian industry do not trust the Liberal government when it comes to trade agreements and that it will base those agreements and negotiations on sound economics and the importance of fair trade. It seems, historically, that the Liberals have been basing their trade negotiations on Liberal ideology and virtue signalling. That is not the way trade negotiations should be going.

As recently as last year, the Liberals implemented a Ukraine goods remission order so Ukrainian products, like chicken for example, would be getting quota-free and tariff-free access into Canada. They signed this remission agreement with zero consultation with the stakeholders that would be impacted: Chicken Farmers of Canada, Egg Farmers of Canada and Canadian Poultry and Egg Processors Council. None of them knew this remission order was being signed. The Liberals signed this at a time when avian flu outbreaks around the world, and certainly here in Canada, were devastating the industry. We had these groups at the agriculture committee letting Finance Canada and Global Affairs know about the impacts of the agreement and saying to please not renew the remission order when it came due last spring.

The Liberal government ignored all that stakeholder consultation at committee and renewed that remission order anyway last spring. This has put our biosecurity and our food security at risk as, again, outbreaks of avian influenza were happening around the world and certainly around Ukraine as well.

Last year, we looked at the Liberal-NDP government's decision to impose a 35% tariff on fertilizer coming from Russia and Belarus. Again, there was zero consultation with Canadian producers, especially those farmers in Ontario and eastern Canada who rely almost totally on that fertilizer.

Now, I understand what the government was trying to do: It was trying to punish Putin for his illegal invasion of Ukraine, but Putin was not paying those tariffs. Canadian farmers paid more than $34 million in tariffs just to get the fertilizer into Canada to plant their crops this spring. No other G7 country put such a tariff on fertilizer. None of our allies, including the United States, did this. They understood the importance of their farmers being competitive and the impact the tariff would have on commodity prices, not only here at home but also around the world.

Again, despite every stakeholder telling the government to lift that tariff to ensure that we are competitive and that we have access to affordable fertilizer, the Liberals have ignored them. In fact, when we asked the government on many occasions why it implemented this tariff when none of our G7 allies did, the answer was, “I didn't even know we bought fertilizer from Russia and Belarus”. This just shows why there is such frustration from our stakeholders and our industry. When it comes to the Liberals negotiating trade agreements, they are not consulting. They are plowing ahead with these agreements without doing their due diligence. As much as we support a free trade agreement with Ukraine, we want to make sure that we have the time to review the details within this agreement.

Most recently, the Liberal-NDP government has fast-tracked the United Kingdom to join the trans-Pacific partnership, the CPTPP, again without consulting with Canadian ranchers and pork producers. They desperately wanted some major gaps within the trade agreement with CETA and Canada to be addressed for the U.K. to have accession to the CPTPP.

The numbers are stark. Last year, the United Kingdom imported about 4,000 tonnes of beef, worth $33 million, into Canada. Do members know how much beef Canada exported into the United Kingdom? It was zero; it was not so much as a burger or a steak. Canada's pork industry is facing a very similar trajectory, as the United Kingdom has put in non-tariff trade barriers to block Canadian imports. Not once has the Liberal government stood up to defend Canadian producers.

Free trade must be fair trade, and we are asking the Liberal government to do a side letter, a bilateral, with the U.K. to address this trade discrepancy. It has yet to do that. This is a massive gap, and Canadian producers are the ones paying the price for the Liberal government getting photo ops and ticking a box when it comes to its agenda, without thinking about the consequences for Canadian industries, manufacturers and producers. One thing is very clear after eight years under the Prime Minister: He is failing Canadian agriculture and our industries on the global stage, and our valuable industries are paying the price.

The Conservative Party supports free trade, and we are very proud of the 40 free trade agreements we signed under Prime Minister Harper. However, those agreements benefited Canadian industry and Canadian workers; they did not come at the expense of our hard-working producers.

We want to clearly and carefully review this trade deal and consult Canadian stakeholders to ensure that we reach a free trade agreement with Ukraine. It should be a free and fair trade agreement, not just ticking a box, that will preserve and enhance Canadian industries, including Canadian agriculture, and not follow the same failed policies and failed direction that the Prime Minister has become very famous for.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I completely disagree with a good part of the member's speech.

Let us talk about facts. He just finished saying “the 43 agreements” under Stephen Harper that they signed off on. That is just not true. Because the member stands up inside the chamber and proclaims something, that does not change history. The history is that it was not Stephen Harper who signed the 40-plus agreements. The member is trying to take credit for those agreements, yet he is being critical of the agreements we signed off on.

The bottom line is that no government in the history of Canada has signed off on as many trade agreements. That directly has an impact on the number of middle-class jobs that have been created, somewhere around a million-plus, prepandemic, and the trade agreements did contribute to that.

I wonder if he could—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Foothills.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member's speech but just because he gets up and says it does not mean it is true.

In fact, by giving the United Kingdom accession to the CPTPP, an agreement that was negotiated by the Harper government, signed off, barely, almost failed, as a result of the Liberal Prime Minister, they are going to deteriorate this agreement by bringing in non-science, non-tariff trade barrier implements into the CPTPP from CETA because of this, by putting the United Kingdom into this agreement without addressing these issues first.

The CPTPP works because it is science-based. Yes, the Liberals also signed CETA, which has been probably the worst trade agreement we have had as a result of their playing with the end result, same with CUSMA.

Under Harper, we signed trade agreements that worked for Canada. Under this government, they are failing Canada.

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

Madam Speaker, I wanted to pay my respects to my hon. colleague from Foothills.

He demonstrates, without a shadow of the doubt, with real clarity, how important it is for our farmers to have the free facility to address some issues, compared to what they have in our counterpart, in America, or somewhere else, with fertilizer, just to give one example.

How could Canada have helped Ukraine and the world if this government had not shut down 15 projects of LNG that we had eight years ago? None of them have been accomplished under the watch of this Liberal government.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Speaker, this is probably the biggest impact we could have had on Ukraine, barring anything else with agriculture or free trade. When two of our important allies, two of the most important economies in the world, come to Canada asking for Canadian LNG so that they can stop funding Putin's war machine, our Prime Minister turns his back and says that he is sorry, that there is no business case for that.

What has happened? They are still funding Putin's war machine and then they have gone to sign LNG agreements with Qatar, which certainly does not have the environmental standards, the humans rights standards or the labour standards that Canadian energy would have.

We could have shown that we have a critical role to play on the global stage, and we failed because of this Prime Minister.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I have been asking a number of questions related to this on cybersecurity. I have mentioned Coding for Veterans, where we have veterans from Canada who are getting training to do coding for cybersecurity.

I would like the member to maybe talk a little bit about the potential for that, because Ukraine has been under a lot of cybersecurity threats. Perhaps this is also an opportunity to do security and economic development. I think those things are really underestimated in terms of potential but could be really good opportunities for us in Ukraine.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Speaker, I do believe there are great opportunities with a free trade agreement with Ukraine, whether that is with agriculture, manufacturing or cybersecurity. Certainly, we could learn some valuable lessons from our NATO allies and what is going on in Ukraine.

However, forgive me if I just have some hesitancy to trust the Liberals on what new chapters and what new details are going to be in this trade agreement, unless we have the time to review it.

That is my only caution to the Liberal government. Do not rush this through. Give parliamentarians and our stakeholders an opportunity to thoroughly review this agreement, to make sure it benefits both parties. The devil is in the details.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Madam Speaker, it is indeed an honour to rise today to speak to Bill C-57. As I think everyone in this place knows, I have been unequivocal in my support for Ukraine, and that will never cease, not only because I am proud of my Ukrainian heritage, but also because Ukraine is in a battle for its life and its very existence.

For 607 days, we have watched on TV, in real time, Russia's illegal invasion. For 607 days, we have watched the barbaric acts of the Russian military. For 607 days, we have watched how Russian soldiers have used sexual violence as a weapon as they raped women and children. For 607 days, we have watched Putin trying to Russify Ukraine and commit another genocide on the soil of Ukraine against the ethnic Ukrainian people. He is trying to emulate exactly what we saw from Joseph Stalin in 1932 and 1933 in the Holodomor, except Putin is being more upfront and aggressive in his mannerisms. For 607 days, we have witnessed Putin and his kleptocrats in the Kremlin refuse to recognize Ukraine as a nation and the people of Ukraine as a people.

However, during those 607 days, we have witnessed, against all odds, the people of Ukraine standing up and fighting back. We have witnessed the valour, courage and bravery of the Ukrainian soldiers as they have fought to hold the line. We have witnessed, for 607 days, the resiliency of the people of Ukraine not only in fighting back, but also in continuing their lives and continuing to rebuild. After every missile strike, they rebuild. For 607 days, I do not think Putin anticipated that he would unite NATO and our allies to support Ukraine unequivocally in its fight for its freedom against Putin and his Kremlin kleptocrats.

It is incumbent upon all of us in the House and upon our allies to hold Vladimir Putin and his proxies to account for their war crimes in Ukraine. They have to be brought before the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice. We know for a fact that Russia has been using sexual violence as a weapon. We know for a fact that it has kidnapped children and families from areas they currently occupy, taken those children, put them up for adoption and are now reprogramming them, or brainwashing them, to be Russian.

This is part of Raphäel Lemkin's definition within the United Nations declaration on genocide. A genocide is when someone is targeting a people based upon their race, ethnicity or religion or when they are going over there, taking people away, replacing them with their own people, taking the children and brainwashing them to become someone they are not.

As Conservatives, we have been very strong in our support for the people of Ukraine. It goes right back to when we were government under Stephen Harper, when the first occupation of Crimea started in 2015 and before that when the revolution of dignity started first on the streets in November 2014. In February 2015, we saw the actions of the illegal occupation and invasion of Crimea, and then war broke out in Donetsk and Luhansk in the Donbas region of Ukraine, and Canada was one of the very first ones in, making sure we were providing military support. We started Operation UNIFIER and started pushing for Ukraine to be included as a member of NATO. That was all done under Stephen Harper and our Conservative government. It is something that I am incredibly proud of.

Since 2018, in opposition, we have been calling on the government to do more to help Ukraine. We asked the government to start sending over weapons, which we were originally going to send to help the Kurdish Peshmerga, the rifles, snipers rifles and ammunition, to Ukraine, so that it would be prepared in case a hot conflict broke out, as we witnessed in February 2022.

We asked the government to start providing RADARSAT images, which did begin under Stephen Harper, but then, of course, that was cancelled under Stéphane Dion when he was foreign affairs minister under the current Liberal government. Only recently, after the hot war broke out in 2022, the Liberals again reinstated providing those RADARSAT images so Ukrainians could see what was happening on their ground by Russian invaders.

We have been calling, since early last year, to donate our surplus armoured vehicles: our Coyote and Bison LAVs, our light-armoured vehicles; our track LAVs; and our M113s that are all destined to go to the trash heap. The Liberals under this Prime Minister want to send them to the scrap pile. Ukraine can use them to save lives as well as to liberate parts of Ukraine that are currently occupied by the Russian invaders.

We know for a fact that we saw the United States and Australia donate their M113s, and that helped liberate Kharkiv. We should be doing the same thing here because these vehicles are otherwise just going to be decommissioned and torn up and sent off to be melted down. We have a company in London, Ontario by the name of Armatec, which is prepared to take those vehicles, refurbish them and send them to Ukraine to make a serious difference in this war. We have GDLS in London that is already building armoured vehicles for Ukraine but at much slower rates than we would see if we were donating our older vehicles that are being decommissioned.

With respect to the free trade agreement, I will just reiterate what my colleague from Foothills just said, which is that we support free trade. We are a party of free trade and we are going to take our time to read through this very large document. However, I was in Ukraine just in August and I can say that the Ukrainians want to do trade with us. They want us to invest. I met with the Minister for Strategic Industries and he was talking about how they need Canada to go in and invest in industries that will not only support our economy but also could possibly support our war efforts as well, so those opportunities exist.

As someone with an agriculture background, I understand how important it is for us to be able to help Ukraine in its agriculture industries and the infrastructure Ukrainians need to get their commodities to market, especially with Russia bombing out their port facilities in the Black Sea region. Therefore, we need to help them with logistics, with infrastructure and as well with what we can pass on in agriculture production technology.

We know that through trade of things like LNG and ethical oil that we produce here in Canada, it would displace the Russian oil that right now Ukraine and our European allies are dependent upon. We are going into another winter in Ukraine and, again, Ukrainians have to continue to use the very natural gas, to heat their homes and their buildings, from the dictator Putin and his tyrants that he associates with, and make use of his energy, which actually puts cash in his pocket to fuel his war machine against Ukraine. We cannot have that happen.

Something that we need to do here in support of Ukraine is actually start building some things Ukraine is calling for. Now that war in Israel has broken out with the terrorist attack by Hamas, and the U.S. is now supporting Israel in the exchanges that are taking place, there is going to be even more need for Canada to provide munitions to Ukraine. Our production of 155 shells for the M777 Howitzers is abysmal. We are producing only around 2,000 rounds a month. We need to replenish our own stocks; plus, we need to make sure that we are providing munitions to Ukraine so that it can continue on with its attacks. Ukraine goes through 2,000 shells in a day and we are producing only that in one month, so we have to step up our production to help Ukraine.

We already donated eight Leopard tanks to Ukraine. We should donate more Leopard tanks. However, at the same time, what about buying some new Leopard tanks for our Canadian Armed Forces? Whatever we are going to be giving to Ukraine, we have to make sure that we replace those, like the M777 Howitzers, in our own Canadian Armed Forces so that we are prepared. Of course, morale continues to suffer under the current Liberals. The troops are leaving in record numbers. We are 16,000 members short. We have a recruiting and retention crisis because of the policies of the current Liberal government.

In conclusion, I will just say this: We all continue to pray for peace in Ukraine, but we know that the only way that is possible is that Ukraine must win. It must be victorious. Canada must continue to support it. Slava Ukraini.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I would like to reflect on the power of trade and trade agreements.

Back in 2013, as the member across the way would recall, the EU trade agreement and the desire of Ukrainian people's to have more trade with the EU, ultimately led and could be tracked to what is happening today in Ukraine and Russia. This is from my perspective and, I suspect, from many people's perspectives. Russia continues to want to dominate the sovereign nation of Ukraine.

Today we have a trade agreement that I suspect everyone would support. At least I would hope that everyone would be supporting it. My question for the member is this: Would he not agree that the power of being able to see this legislation pass, ultimately, even before Christmas, goes far beyond just the economic benefits to both countries?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Madam Speaker, once again, I just want to thank the member for Abbotsford, who actually started the free trade talks with Ukraine when he was minister of trade. I was proud to accompany him on one of those trips before we lost government in 2015. He laid the groundwork. This bill, of course, has additional chapters.

One thing is, if it is going beyond trade, then I would recommend it. If we are talking about agriculture, for example, why do we not see a section in here on getting rid of the land mines? We have heard about some horrific accidents happening right now in the south of Ukraine, in the Kherson region. Farmers are out there trying to plant their winter wheat in land that has been taken back from the Russians by the Ukrainian military. The mine density in the fields is ridiculous. It is very dangerous out there.

We need to be putting more effort into helping Ukraine demine those areas. However, before they can even demine them, they actually have to push the Russian invaders back so they could have control of those lands without being fearful of being bombed while they are out there trying to remove those mines.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Madam Speaker, as I listened to my colleague's speech, it detailed a very important issue. We heard that the Liberal government is going to cut $1 billion from our military. My question for him is this: How can we continue to support these efforts without those funds?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I made an error. I should not have recognized the member, because she is not sitting in her seat to ask the question.

I want to remind members that they should be in their seats. We are not under the previous rules.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Madam Speaker, this is an issue that we really have to be concerned about.

The Liberals have already allowed over $10 billion of the national defence budget to lapse over the last several years. This is money that should have been spent on our armed forces and has not been. Our troops are dealing with a number of crises right now within the forces, including the cost of living and housing. We hear stories about them actually going out and asking for donations to help offset those costs.

We know that the $1 billion that is coming out now is coming at the wrong time. As I mentioned in my speech, we have donated howitzers, Leopard tanks and armoured vehicles to Ukraine. However, every time we donate, we also have to replenish our own stock of munitions and equipment to make sure that our army, air force and navy are mobile and expeditionary and can do the job that we call upon them to do from time to time.

The world, as we are witnessing, is getting scarier all the time. If we do not have strong Canadian Armed Forces, they are not going to be able to guarantee our peace, security and way of life right here in Canada.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Speaker, I want to ask the member about the economic impact assessments of free trade agreements and how wide or narrow those assessments should be. What does the member think about the fact that an economic impact assessment is missing in this case?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Madam Speaker, this is one of the reasons that we should not be rushing through this free trade agreement.

We need to take the time to look at it and study it. We just had it presented to us over the last few days. It needs to go to committee to allow stakeholders to comment on it. We need to make sure that such things as the economic impacts and environmental assessments are thoroughly debated to see whether they are in the interest of both Canadian exporters and Ukrainian importers, and vice versa.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, as always, it is an honour to rise and debate the issues that are so important to my constituents and Canadians from coast to coast.

I will be splitting my time.

We are debating Bill C-57, the implementation of the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement. It is a behemoth of a bill, more than 600 pages. The reason I bring this up is because I want to provide a little context. The Liberals' track record is that they stand in this place and say they have to pass something without delay or debate and anything that even resembles us doing our jobs in this place would be considered obstructionist. Those are things that the Liberals level often against members of His Majesty's loyal opposition, yet it is our duty to make sure that we comprehensively debate and discuss the issues that come before this place.

This is, indeed, the case when it comes to a 600-or-so page bill that has far-reaching implications, not only for us and our national economy, but also for one of our allies. I would emphasize how important this is for the economic success of Ukraine right now, which is facing something that most Canadians who have grown up in Canada have not faced, and that is conflict at home. Although Canada has about 1.3 or 1.4 million Canadians of Ukrainian descent, the fact is that Ukraine right now is embroiled in a conflict where Russia illegally invaded Ukraine sovereignty, so we have to get this right.

So often over the last four years I have had the honour of sitting in this place when the Liberals are quick to point to anything that would question any part of anything they do. That is pretty broadly speaking, but it rings very true. I am sure my colleagues would agree with me that when we try to do our jobs, they claim it is simply obstruction.

I remember in this place, shortly after I was elected, having to deal with the updated NAFTA, the CUSMA. The Liberal government, instead of releasing comprehensive numbers about the impact of the new trade agreement and some of the factors that would be in place, came with great gusto to a press conference and said that we either do not pass the CUSMA and there is economic devastation or we do pass it and we are okay. It did not outline the myriad of details that were included in what is an incredibly complex thing, and that is international trade negotiations.

When it comes to trade, it is the Conservative Party that has such a tremendous track record. It is the framework and the agreement that this trade agreement is replacing or being built upon, which is a better way to put it, that was started by the previous Conservative government under Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the international leadership that he showed in building free and fair trade with nations around the world. There have been numerous times, including CETA, where the Liberals almost dropped the ball. Virtually all that had to be done was for the agreement to be signed, yet the Liberals almost dropped the ball, which would have wrought economic devastation.

Then we saw more recently the Canada-United Kingdom Free Trade Agreement. The Liberals claimed victory, yet it seems like they forgot to attend the briefings and certainly did not speak to many stakeholders when concerns should have been addressed in the process of trade negotiations. It is a shame, because it is during the negotiations process, when the details are being worked out and the 600 pages are being written, when there is a back and forth, a give and take, in trade negotiations.

I would just note that when I listened to my colleague from Abbotsford, he has probably forgotten more about free trade than most Liberals will ever know. I do not have the number off the top of my head, but there were negotiations with dozens and dozens of countries with which Canada has a positive, free and fair trading relationship because of his work and the work of the previous Conservative government.

[An hon. member]

There are 43.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, there are 43. It is so impressive that is the legacy of Canada's Conservatives.

We have before us a bill that addresses a host of things, but I would highlight a couple of concerns that have been highlighted to me.

One has to do with some of Canada's protected sectors, including chicken. I know that over the course of the conflict in Ukraine, we need to make sure the concerns of our domestic industries are being noted. It is unclear to me whether these concerns have been addressed.

Some of the other concerns could be of great benefit to both countries, like making sure that our defence infrastructures are brought into alignment and ensuring that we support Ukraine with the weapons and materials that it has to have in order to repel the illegal Russian invasion. There is also ensuring that the tools required for Ukrainian producers, and farmers specifically, are there. I often refer to the breadbasket of North America, which is part of the area that I represent, but many in this place will have learned in their high school textbooks about the breadbasket of Europe, Ukraine, and the rich legacy it has in being able to produce high-quality agricultural goods, many of which have been put at risk because of Russia's illegal invasion.

We need to ensure that when we are negotiating free trade deals, including when it is with an ally facing circumstances like Ukraine is today, we are doing everything we can to ensure we get them right. Specifically, one segment here is so important that it cannot be emphasized enough, and that is the role that energy plays. I will make something very clear: Canadian energy, with the role it plays when prioritized, when promoted and when given the opportunity to displace dictator crude and despot gas, makes the world safer.

The unfortunate legacy of the last eight years under this costly Prime Minister and his coalition partners is that Canada has been restricted from being the peacemaker we should be. When it comes to any conversation around free trade, the more we can prioritize Canadian energy to be the common-sense displacement globally of dictator and despot crude and gas, the better our world is for it. Unfortunately, we have a legacy under the Liberal Prime Minister and his coalition partners that has been truly devastating to world peace.

Now, some might say that is a bit extreme, but when we look at the facts, we have a country facing war, Ukraine, which we are talking about now in terms of free trade, and its people are forced to purchase the very gas required to heat their homes and the very fuel required to fuel their vehicles and tanks. In some ways, they are forced to purchase it from none other than their aggressor. That is a shame, and it should be a moral imperative for every single one of us in this place to stand with Ukraine. That includes standing with Canadian energy so that we can get it to market and ensure that we displace the foreign dictator crude and despot gas that have been funding Putin's war machine. The best way to ensure there is peace and security is making sure there is energy security globally. That contributes to food security, and food security contributes directly to peace and security.

It is unfortunate that it is only the Conservatives who seem to see that reality here in our country. I can tell members that when it comes to making sure that Canada has free and fair trade agreements going forward, it will be a new Conservative prime minister, the member for Carleton, who will make sure that it is prioritized globally and that Canada can succeed and prosper. By doing so, the entire world will benefit.

When it comes to Bill C-57, there are so many unanswered questions. I would challenge any member from any other political party in this place to make sure they take the time to get it right, because if we get it right, we can help Canada's role in trade, Canada's role in providing energy and Canada's role in providing our expertise. We can be part of the solution. However, if we get it wrong, we could end up making it more difficult for our own people, and we could end up seeing significant challenges.

I look forward to answering questions on this as we continue to support trade and the people of Ukraine. In any discussion that we have in the House, let us make sure to get it right, because if we do not, the consequences will be dire.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

We have time for a brief question. The other questions will be taken the next time this is before the House.

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader has the floor.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, if one wants to get the Conservatives upset, just tell them the reality that when it comes to trade agreements, the government has signed off on more trade agreements than Stephen Harper did. That is a clear fact of history, yet the member gets all excited about the importance of trade agreements. I agree; we should be excited about them, especially this one, because it is the first time a trade agreement would be expanded upon when one of the countries is at war. There is a great deal of appetite from a wide spectrum of stakeholders to see this legislation pass.

My question to the member is this: He says he wants lots of time to be able to debate this—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I am sorry, but I did say I needed a brief question.

A brief answer from the hon. member for Battle River—Crowfoot.