Debates of Oct. 24th, 2023

Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, 2023

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we know that Parliament and elected representatives have a very limited ability to modify the agreement. All we can do is vote for the bill or propose amendments, but we cannot change the agreement itself. In most industrialized countries, however, elected representatives can participate in and directly influence free trade agreements and treaties. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.

[Kody Blois, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. We could assess our process here in the House of Commons and review the method used to study bills related to free trade agreements, like the one with the European Union or other countries. That might be a good idea.

However, the process does not yet exist, so for now this remains the prerogative of the executive, of the government. However, I thank the member for his suggestion.

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Waterloo, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member chairs, and participates heavily on, the agriculture committee. We have had a lot of conversations within the chamber, especially when it comes to equity-seeking communities and so forth. I think what we are seeing with the questions coming from the official opposition is that it is important that we recognize the economic abilities of all sectors and all people within society. Sometimes what Canadians do not pay attention to are those nuances and the importance of different communities' having their voices heard, whether that is through the lens of our farmers who work so hard to feed us, of the women who bring life into this world and contribute so heavily in so many different ways or of the first peoples of our country, to whom we owe an important nation-to-nation relationship. I would like to hear the member's comments on the importance of this legislation and how he sees us moving forward in a more meaningful and better way.

[Kody Blois, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I want to address some of the comments again, because the member referenced the Conservatives in her question.

There were a couple of things that were said by the member for Cumberland—Colchester. It was not only that the legislation was woke, but also that somehow Canada was taking advantage of Ukraine. I think it is very condescending to suggest that the sovereign Government of Ukraine does not know what is in its own best interest; that is how that is perceived from where I sit. We are trying to deepen economic partnerships. The member for Etobicoke Centre has been on record talking about how President Zelenskyy really valued the opportunity to be here in Canada to focus on the economic relationship.

To pivot away from my concern and distain for the comment that was made, it was notable that no Conservative colleague stepped up to ask a question on my remarks here today. Perhaps the Conservatives are a bit embarrassed by what was just said.

To address the hon. member's question, I think there is a tremendous opportunity, as was mentioned, in the agriculture sector. Services and digital, which are being included as part of this legislation, are also huge opportunities between our two countries, so we should be trying to explore all opportunities. Canada is a trading nation. We benefit from having these relationships around the world.

I look forward to this legislation's being advanced.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am of course very proud to be the member of Parliament for Edmonton Strathcona.

Today, we are talking about the free trade agreement with Ukraine. As every member of the House knows, we are an immense ally of Ukraine. Canada was the first western country to recognize Ukraine's independence in 1991, and, of course, Canada is home to the third-largest population of Ukrainians in the world, third only to Ukraine and Russia. As members would know, many people of the Ukrainian diaspora reside in my riding, in my province and certainly across the Prairies. Therefore, I am glad to see that we are debating this bill after the agreement was delayed by Putin's illegal war, the illegal invasion that Putin and the Russian Federation have made against the Ukrainian people.

Trade agreements are very important. They are an important part of our relationship with Ukraine. They are an important part of our relationship with our allies. It is vital that we have strong trade relationships with Ukraine, now more than ever as Ukraine fights for its freedom and builds more, better and stronger relationships with the west.

Russia's illegal invasion and genocidal war against Ukraine has had a profound impact on Canada. It has had a profound impact on the Ukraine-Canada trade relationship. We have seen exports to Ukraine fall by nearly a third since the war started, and it is important to have a trade agreement that would restore those exports once Ukraine is victorious in the war against Russia.

However, trade negotiations must be transparent, and Canadians and parliamentarians have the right to know both the costs and the benefits of proposed trade agreements before they are signed. The current Liberal government has failed in this regard. We were given this legislation very late last week. We are debating it in the House on Monday and Tuesday. We have had no time to discuss this with our colleagues at caucus, despite the fact that this agreement was negotiated in April and signed in September. There was ample opportunity for the government to give us more time to discuss this trade agreement with our colleagues and our caucuses. I hope the Liberal government reflects on that. Certainly from my perspective, that could and should been done better and would have shown more respect for parliamentarians and for the Ukraine-Canada trade agreement.

The importance of transparency in trade deals is very apparent as well. We have seen this. In 2014, under Stephen Harper, we learned about a secret trade deal that the Conservatives had negotiated with China, which had been signed two years earlier in Russia. That trade agreement with China was ratified without the participation of Parliament, and the consequences and the lack of transparency will be with us for decades. Chinese interests now control significant parts of our natural resources industries. Cheap Chinese steel produced from coal from Alberta is undermining our coal sector. Canadian grocery stores are full of Chinese food products with few or no environmental or human rights standards associated with them.

We have spoken in the House a bit today about some of the comments we have heard from the Conservative Party about this legislation's being woke, which is absolutely absurd. There should never be a trade relationship that Canada has that does not involve our looking at human rights, at environmental protections and at Canadian jobs and the impacts on Canadian workers. The success of the trade deals that we negotiate as a country can never be measured purely by trade and purely by corporate profit. They have to be measured by a number of different things.

I sit beside the good member for Edmonton Griesbach, who is an absolute champion for indigenous people in this country, for Métis people in this country and for Inuit people in this country. For him to have to sit here and listen to folks say that adhering to UNDRIP, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, is woke is absolutely shameful.

We sat in the international human rights subcommittee meeting today. We met with a Honduran, Elvin Hernandez, who is a human rights investigator. He spoke about the Canada free trade agreement with Honduras and about how it did not help the people of Honduras.

He said that no one looked at human rights when they negotiated it. There was no conversation at that time to look at human rights. He talked about the impact it has had on women, children, indigenous people, folks in the community who have stood up for environmental rights and people in the community who have stood up for human rights. Because of the free trade agreement we negotiated, those rights were not protected. It is something to keep in mind.

We also heard from Robert McCorquodale, who is the vice-chair of the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights. He said that if we do not look at human rights when we do this important work, we put people at risk. It is something we really need to do and something that, from my perspective, is the furthest thing from being superfluous, or whatever the Conservatives are trying to say with their insensitive woke comments.

We need a trade deal that is good for Ukraine and that is good for Canada. This renegotiated deal with Ukraine includes chapters that would ensure both Canada and Ukraine maintain their right to regulate in key areas such as environment, health, safety, indigenous rights, gender equality and cultural diversity. This is very important.

I welcome the provisions for temporary entry for those conducting business in either country. I like the idea of removing barriers from entry for business people, professionals and their spouses. That will lead to stronger economic and social ties with Ukraine and stronger economic benefits for Canadians. I also welcome the labour standards provisions in this agreement. It is vital we protect labour rights.

When we look at trade agreements, we always have to consider labour rights and the workers who depend on those rights. This agreement does this with a few different things we are pleased to see, such as the sections that respect labour laws, the import prohibition on goods made in whole or in part with forced labour, a commitment to the content of all core international labour organization conventions and a stand-alone article on violence against workers. These are important things to have as part of our agreement.

I am disappointed in how the government brought this agreement forward. I am disappointed I have not had the opportunity to sit with my colleagues and discuss this agreement, as would be the norm and as would be expected. While I am disappointed in the lack of transparency we have seen in the development of this agreement, I do support a trade agreement with Ukraine. I do think it needs to happen.

I am going to need to take some time to look at this one and see whether I can provide support for it, because this is important work, and I do not take this work lightly. I am also looking very forward to seeing more Ukrainian products on the shelves in the stores in Edmonton. We have a large Ukrainian population, and my name is not very Ukrainian, but I can eat Ukrainian food with the best of them. I know my way around a cabbage roll, as everyone in Edmonton does.

I am extraordinarily excited to see Ukrainian products in food stores like K&K Foodliner, a local food specialty store right in my own riding of Edmonton Strathcona. I hope this agreement will mean greater economic ties between our countries and more made-in-Ukraine products in our local stores.

Let us support Ukraine. Let us help Ukrainians rebuild their country. Let us work together as friends for the benefit of both countries.

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Waterloo, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's feedback. We can always endeavour to make processes better and to ensure there are more voices heard, because what we do not want to do is make it so members do not have the opportunity to be part of those conversations. I hear that feedback wholeheartedly, and I will do whatever I can to encourage government to always do these things better.

I also appreciated her comments in regard to her community and the opportunities there. I think about so many communities across our country that continue to endeavour to grow, to be able to prosper and to be included. Something that was heard today in a question by the official opposition was very disturbing. When some people in this place talk about Canadians, it appears there are many of us not being included.

I think about what is happening in the world today. I think about what Ukraine is taking on to fight for democracy when it comes to international law. I also think about how it will have to rebuild and what this agreement could do to help it rebuild faster and to ensure those factions of its society who sometimes would be left behind could actually be included.

I would like to hear the member's thoughts as to how she believes an agreement like this could better help more members of not only the Ukrainian society but also Canadians, and how we actually do better to see more Canadians and more Ukrainians are able to grow and prosper.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in March of this year, I actually travelled to Ukraine. I wanted to meet with government officials. I wanted to see what was happening on the ground in Kyiv and Irpin. When I met with government representatives and when I met with parliamentarians from Ukraine, one of the things they wanted was support from Canada to help rebuild their country. They wanted us to be working with them to rebuild.

I spent some time talking to folks working in different areas and different sectors, and I can tell members that, ultimately, the people who suffer the most in any war are women, are children, are marginalized people. The war in Ukraine is no different.

We need to help Ukraine rebuild. We need to be there for our ally. We also need to recognize that after this war is won, the people who are most vulnerable and the people who will need the most support are women, girls and indigenous people.

That needs to be the priority of our trade agreements as well.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed my colleague's speech.

She was critical of the FIPA, the investment treaty, that Canada signed with China, but the 1994 FIPA, or investment treaty, with Ukraine and this new modernized free trade agreement with Ukraine both contain similar provisions.

I am wondering if she is going to be encouraging her colleagues in the NDP to strip the Ukraine trade agreement of these provisions or if she is supportive of including those kinds of investment protections in this new free trade agreement with Ukraine.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, 1994 was significantly before my time, so I will focus a little bit more on the more recent 2014 free trade agreement that Harper and the Conservatives signed with China.

I do not think many Canadians know that it was signed and that we gave up so much of our rights and that we, in fact, made it so much harder for workers in our country because of that. There are still clauses within that fair trade agreement that are making it very difficult for us to even have legislation put in place for forced labour. It already handicaps what we can do to protect workers in Canada and to protect workers in China.

I do not know about 1994. I am not going to answer that one because, like I said, I think I was in elementary school at the time.

Certainly, the one in 2014 that I have looked at quite a lot is one that I am disappointed in, and I certainly hope that the Conservatives do not get another opportunity to negotiate another free trade agreement with China.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

In 1994, I was engaged to be married.

The hon. member for La Pointe-de-l'Île.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on two points.

First, as with other free trade agreements, it is the executive branch that acts alone. Elected representatives and opposition members do not have direct access to the chapters or any direct influence on the content of the agreement. What does my colleague think? Would she agree with the idea of coming up with another mechanism?

Second, the chapter on investments still allows for an investor, a multinational, to sue a state directly. Since these are international agreements, they are supposed to be agreements between nations. However, it is as though multinationals are being put on the same footing as nations. Does my colleague not think that this should be changed?

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this is a little more broad than perhaps what he was looking for with his question, but I would say that, in fact, Canada's foreign policy has tilted very heavily toward trade, to the detriment of diplomacy, peacekeeping, security, development, all of these other pieces. I think the problem is that our foreign policy has to be built as a table. We need all of those legs for it to be effective and for it to work. When we prioritize trade over human rights, over security, over peace building, I think that is a real problem.

I do see some flaws with this legislation. Like I said earlier, I have not had time to really go through it, but I certainly see some flaws with this legislation. Our caucus will have to take a look and see if we will be supporting it or not.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to participate in this debate on legislation concerning the free trade agreement between Canada and Ukraine, for a variety of reasons. I love my country, I love Ukraine and I am a strong supporter of free trade. This agreement was created under a Conservative government. Later we will have the opportunity to come back to that. As a good Conservative, I support entering into free trade agreements with as many countries as possible, provided they are good countries, of course.

When we talk about Ukraine, we cannot disregard the fact that this country has proven to humanity as a whole that resilience is the defining trait of these people and this nation, or that their strength of character only grew clearer when the Russian ogre outrageously invited itself into that country. Putin's illegal attack on Ukraine made people realize that, unfortunately, in the 21st century, we can still experience the same atrocities as in the First and Second World Wars, what we would call traditional wars. Nevertheless, the strong, proud people of Ukraine have been able to withstand the crass and heinous attacks from Putin's Russia, and they are heading for victory. We are all hoping for that outcome, and above all, we are hoping for an end to the hostilities, because there are no winners in war. There are only losers who lose friends, loved ones, family, and people who suffer under the illegal bombing. When we think of Ukraine, our thoughts are with the people who are currently experiencing the horrors of the war.

As a resident of Quebec City, I was very touched by the young pee-wee hockey players who came to Quebec City despite the war, to play in the cadet league hockey tournament. In front of a very emotional and united crowd of Quebec City residents, they demonstrated that kids can still be kids and still have fun, even if their country is at war. That also reminds me that I invited two young players from the pee-wee tournament, two Ukrainians, to be here in the House when President Zelenskyy addressed Canadians. They also had the privilege of shaking hands with their president, and I was very proud of that moment, which was tremendously emotional for these young people.

Ukraine and Canada have a lot in common. We obviously have the same climate. We also have a very strong agricultural tradition. It is not for nothing that the Ukrainian flag represents the sky and the land, using the same colours we find in Saskatchewan. It is no fluke. There is wheat, of course, but beyond that, there are historical connections that unite us through immigration. Several speakers today reiterated that Canada has the third-largest Ukrainian population after Ukraine and Russia, with 1.3 million Ukrainian Canadians. Some are descendants of the huge community that came to settle here in Canada at the turn of the 20th century and in the 1920s and 1930s. They have enriched Canada with their presence, their culture and especially their extraordinary work effort. It has to be said that we also share a passion for hockey. We are not Nordic countries for nothing. We are not countries that love the snow for nothing. We have this fine tradition, as I was saying earlier, that was beautifully highlighted at the International Pee-Wee Hockey Tournament.

I cannot help but think that Canada could be doing even more for Ukraine. If we had made the necessary decisions seven or eight years ago, we could have helped Ukraine tremendously with the economic aspect of its war against Russia, and we could have helped our allies, especially European countries, support Ukraine instead of helping Russia by buying its natural resources. In that regard, I have to point out how painful it is to recall that, eight years ago, there were nearly 15 liquefied natural gas projects and ports to export it. Unfortunately, for eight years, for dogmatic and ideological reasons, the current government has done everything in its power to ensure that these 15 projects would not succeed. Imagine if, instead, we had been led for eight years by a government with a vision for the future, one that wanted the whole world to benefit from the bounty we have here when it comes to natural resources. We know how to develop them in an intelligent and environmentally friendly way, with the ethics that have always characterized Canadians. No, instead of having access to our natural resources, countries now have to knock on Russia's door to get liquefied natural gas.

That is crazy. We could be a source of pride on the international stage, but this government did nothing to properly develop Canada's liquefied natural gas potential for eight years because of ideological reasons. We may be speaking with emotion about Ukraine today, but we cannot turn a blind eye to that reality. The great country of Germany is caught between a rock and a hard place and has no choice but to ask Russia for energy, when we have energy but prefer to keep it under the ground. That is unfortunate. It is not just Canada and Canadians who are losing out, but also the people of Ukraine and Germany, who would have been happy to have access to our natural resources.

Since we are talking about free trade, I would remind the House that free trade is a defining feature of the party that I represent, the Conservative Party. Let us remember that the key steps toward free trade began with the free trade agreement with the United States. In 1988 and 1989, we had a prime minister who had vision and who put everything in place for an agreement with the United States. The free trade agreement was approved by the public in the 1988 election. We are grateful to the Right Hon. Brian Mulroney for his vision. He was likely the greatest prime minister of the 20th century.

Later on, there were the colossal efforts made by Prime Minister Stephen Harper to sign free trade agreements with other countries. I want to commend the outstanding contribution of the member for Abbotsford. During the final five years of the Conservative Party's time in government, he was the architect of our country's exceptional development in the area of free trade. He was the one who succeeded in negotiating agreements with Europe, America and the Pacific.

Under the direction of the former minister of international trade, the current member for Abbotsford, we made our mark on nearly five continents. The sun almost never set on this empire of positive economic free trade and wealth creation. We believe in free trade because our country is a large, wonderful place, brimming with natural resources. Above all, we are proud of how smart and hard-working Canada's 40 million citizens are.

Let us keep one thing in mind, though. When a local market has 40 million people in it and a nearby neighbour has almost 350 million, maybe it takes a bit more. That is why our country is, in a sense, condemned to always having free trade agreements so we can open up our market and export Canada's know-how, our natural resources, our energy and our products, which are produced so efficiently thanks to Canadian workers and Canadian ingenuity. That means we need free trade agreements.

Our party, the Conservative Party, was the architect of free trade in the 20th and early 21st centuries. It is the party of free trade. As everyone knows, we are always open to the idea of win-win agreements. That is key to a good free trade agreement. As one of my old bosses used to tell me all the time, a good agreement is an honest agreement. The idea is not to make sneaky attempts to put one over on the other party. The whole point is for it to be win-win. That is how outstanding free trade agreements, like the ones the member for Abbotsford negotiated when he was international trade minister, are made.

I see that time has run out. How very sad that I have to stop there.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

The next time this matter is before the House, the member will have five minutes for questions and comments.

The House resumed from June 20 consideration of the motion that Bill C-278, Prevention of Government-imposed Vaccination Mandates Act, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Prevention of Government-Imposed Vaccination Mandates Act

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

Mr. Speaker, the other day I talked about how reckless the opposition party is. It can be a great risk to talk about many of the things it talks about. I would like to suggest that, when it comes to the reckless behaviour of a political party, all one really needs to do to get an appreciation of that is to listen to how the Conservative Party has been talking about COVID-19.

We have a very active ongoing interest in COVID. Contrary to what some Conservatives might believe about COVID-19, people are still testing positive for it today. It is very important, not only for the federal government but also other levels of government of all political stripes, to recognize the health hazard that was caused as a direct result of COVID-19. It varied depending on population and density in different regions of our country. That is one of the reasons we took a team Canada approach to dealing with COVID-19. It was a worldwide issue, a pandemic that did not spare any country.

Here in Canada, we had strong leadership coming from the Prime Minister's office, all the way down, working with the different provinces, municipalities, indigenous leaders, not to mention numerous stakeholders and some opposition parties. It was taken very seriously. We saw some provinces even put in a curfew. Most provinces had mandatory masking put into place.

A couple of the Conservatives are a little sensitive about this because they opposed all that in many different ways. They certainly did act as if they were very proud of that fact, which is good for them.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day, there are many Conservatives who opposed mandatory masking, no matter whether it was coming from progressive Conservative provincial governments or from the Government of Canada in certain situations. The difference is that those who were in power, the provincial governments, municipalities and the federal government relied on health care professionals, individuals who had the expertise as opposed to—

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Order. The way I look at it is that, the more we interrupt the hon. member, the longer we have to listen to the speeches, and the longer it will take to get through PMB.

The hon. parliamentary secretary has the floor.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your trying to tame the Conservatives on this particular issue.

What transpired, virtually from day one of the pandemic, was an educational curve for all of us. We saw things, such as the importance of masking, become a reality. Initially, that was not necessarily being advocated for. We learned the importance of washing ones hands and of ventilation for collections of people in groups. We also saw different provinces in particular coming to the table with their health experts, recognizing something that the Conservatives did not recognize, which was that it was a public health issue.

Contrary to what the Conservative Party tries to espouse, vaccinations worked. Vaccinations made a difference. That is why we saw the different provinces and stakeholders get behind it in a very significant way. There were some protests. We saw that first-hand. We saw a number of Conservative members of Parliament who went out to protesters, gave them a pat on the back and applauded them for what they were doing. Public health, what the City of Ottawa was going through and what was happening at border crossings, with billions of dollars put at risk, did not matter. The reckless direction coming from the Conservative Party was truly amazing.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. A number of Conservatives have come in to listen to the member for Winnipeg North, but I cannot even hear him because they are heckling so loudly. Perhaps you could ask them to tone it down a little so I can hear the member.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

I thank the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands. I did not think the tone had reached that level yet, but I will ask members to please be respectful of the member for Winnipeg North, who has the floor.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that members have come in to listen to me getting wound up over an important issue.

We got a lot of resistance when we started talking about the behaviour of some of the Conservatives. I truly believe that there some who recognize the importance of public health and see the value of vaccinations, but a good portion do not, and this is from the leader down. The person who really gave birth to this legislation was the leader of the Conservative Party.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!