Debates of Oct. 24th, 2023

Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, 2023

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like begin by reiterating to my colleague that free trade is, indeed, important. Free trade agreements can help create jobs, but the gains from free trade must be properly distributed among the citizens of the countries involved. There are always winners and losers.

Of course, the parliamentary secretary is aware that Ukraine is a minor trading partner for Canada. It is a very small trading partner in terms of volume. As I said, it is a country at war, and we must express our solidarity. If the parliamentary secretary is trying to get me to say—as the Conservatives and his own government are saying—that we need to hurry up and produce dirty hydrogen and extract more gas to export to Ukraine, I think I will leave it to the Conservatives and Liberals to share that message. They are very good at it.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague mentioned off the top that the Bloc was supporting the bill, and it seems to be a fait accompli, that everything was done behind closed doors and we are just implementing it. However, there is a section in the bill he was concerned about on investor-state dispute mechanisms, which is the foreign investment protection agreement of 1995 rolled into this new version. I am wondering if the Bloc will support this and then ask for amendments in committee. What are they going to do about this?

These are things that both the NDP and Bloc seem to be concerned about, where we would have foreign corporations that could sue Canadian governments at all levels for legislation that we want to bring in to protect our environment and protect our citizens. I am wondering what the Bloc's attitude toward that is.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is sad that the issue of multinationals suing states still features in free trade agreements. They are more likely to be found in bilateral free trade agreements such as these. We could say that this is a Canadian mistake because the government had the opportunity to have this removed from the agreement.

To answer my colleague's very good question, when this bill is studied in committee, we certainly will not be supporting this part of the agreement implementation bill. We will not be in favour of these clauses. This reminds us that we must think more broadly about the impact of these clauses. In the 1990s, there was the whole issue of environmental policies. However, as my colleague, the international trade critic, said, the reality is that today a Russian oligarch with one foot in Ukraine could make an investment in Canada. By imposing a sanctions regime, we could be liable to be sued by a Russian oligarch because we have allowed these multinationals to sue the state.

I think this is one of those types of clauses that go well beyond what was originally intended. We will have to think about removing them sooner or later.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's trenchant condemnation of the lack of transparency in most of these negotiations. What a shame the Liberals did not listen during his speech. Had they listened, they might understand when we ask them questions about investor-state dispute settlement. Maybe they would not get that mixed up with state-to-state dispute settlement, and then maybe they could avoid giving us an answer that has nothing to do with the question. I think it would have done them good to pay a little attention.

As a member of the Standing Committee on International Trade and as a member of the same party as my colleague, I would ask him whether he agrees with my voting against this specific provision despite supporting the cause.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there are still people here, including my colleague from Saint‑Hyacinthe—Bagot, who believe in the work of parliamentarians, who believe in the work of MPs and who believe in the legislative process. That is why it bothers my colleague when members of the party in power joke around and talk and play on their computers and do not listen to opposition members.

When they read the blues, because they were not listening in the House, they will see that I agree with my colleague 100%. In committee, we will have absolutely no qualms about voting against these provisions, which deserve much more in-depth consideration because Canada is party to a lot of bilateral agreements.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to speak to such an important piece of legislation, not just for Canada and for the people of Canada but, indeed, for Ukraine.

In my comments and remarks on this today, I will indicate why I think it is so incredibly important for us to do this, particularly right now, while Ukraine is still engaged in this conflict, which was entirely provoked by Vladimir Putin and has affected their livelihoods to such a high degree.

What we know, for starters, is that Bill C-57 is a modernization of an existing agreement that is already in place with Ukraine for free trade. This is an opportunity for us to modernize what is in place, to bring in new, very important language to the agreement, which reflects the changes in trade we are seeing throughout the world right now, in Canada and everywhere else.

I think it is also extremely important to talk about the fact that Ukraine's economy decreased by roughly 50% just within the last year. Members can imagine the impact of that if it were to happen to Canada. We can visualize how devastating that would be.

As it is a key ally of ours, I think it is extremely important that we prepare for what is next for Ukraine. When they ultimately do win this conflict, this war with Russia, we will have made sure that all of the tools are in place so that Ukraine can come bouncing back as quickly and effectively as possible to, most importantly, rebuild their country and their economy, as it relates to the outputs they had.

This is where Canada has an advantage. I should note that Canada is the first country to modernize its free trade agreement with Ukraine since the war broke out a year and a half ago. Why I see this as being so important is that, to make sure that Ukraine can hit the ground running when the time comes, we need to make sure that these agreements are in place.

I am sure that many members of the House are aware that the Canadian company Aecon has already lined up contracts to help Ukraine rebuild. This is going to be some of the economic advantages for Canada. On the other side of things, we are going to see advantages for Ukraine, as they have access to parts of the Canadian market.

My understanding is that the existing trade agreement already provides the elimination of 99.9% of import duties from Ukraine. This means that the goods and services that Ukraine will be trying to sell outside of their borders, after and during the time it is rebuilding, would have an open market to Canada. This is incredibly important because, when a country is going through that process of rebuilding, as Ukraine ultimately will be, they are going to be looking for open doors in the world.

For Canada to be at the forefront of that and to say that we are here to support Ukraine through trade, commerce and opportunities, new opportunities, in a mutual way that benefits both countries is extremely important.

We know that trade, generally speaking, increases the quality of life in both the respective countries that are trading. Indeed, that is why we see trade happening throughout the world, and that is why the Liberal Party and the Liberal government is so supportive of free trade. It is one of the reasons why we have introduced and signed more free trade agreements than any other government in Canadian history. it is because we strongly believe and see the value in trade as it exists with other countries.

There is a net benefit, at the end of the day, for both countries, if those trade relationships are set up in a way that is designed to be prosperous for both, so that both can prosper and neither is at a particular disadvantage. I, like others, really hope we can see this bill get over the finish line before the end of this year, by Christmas. That would really put Ukraine in the position that it needs to be in.

When I say that I hope the bill gets past the finish line, I mean I hope this bill finishes the process in this chamber, gets to the Senate, finishes its process in the Senate, and then it can be signed by the Governor General as an act of Parliament by that point.

I genuinely hope we can put aside partisanship. I certainly am not one to shy away from being partisan at the right opportunities. I certainly am, but on this particular issue, I think it is much greater than just Canada. It is much greater than just one political party or another political party. This is an issue, quite frankly, about supporting Ukraine with everything we have been doing. I think it is absolutely critical that this be one of those things.

For all we have done in terms of support, such as training troops, being there for Ukraine and providing whatever we can while it fights the war, this is probably one of the most important things we could do to set Ukraine up for success when it wins the war. Really, what this ultimately comes down to is making sure that it is successful.

When I think of Canada being the first to modernize this agreement, I am reminded of when I was on the national defence committee from 2015 to 2019. I had the opportunity to travel while we were studying Operation Unifier, and another operation, the name of which escapes me right now. We travelled to Ukraine, and of course, this is when the conflict in Crimea was ongoing, and we would hear from the various leaders in Ukraine.

I can vividly recall one conversation our representatives from the defence committee had while sitting at a table with the chair of the Ukraine defence committee. He made a point of telling us that the importance of Canada's role in being there was so much greater than anything it could provide them militarily.

The importance of Canada being there means that other countries are following suit. We could even see that in the brigade Canada was leading. There were a number of countries lining up behind it that wanted to be part of what Canada was committed to. It really struck me when I heard those words what we can signal to the rest of the world when we are involved in something. Canada has a reputation throughout the world of being a country that can really lead the way and that can show good judgment.

When I think of that, and when I think of this agreement, it is another way we can show the world that, yes, Ukraine is going through a conflict right now. We will be there to support it, but we also want to make sure we are there to help it rebuild when this is over and when it ultimately wins the war.

What we are seeing with this agreement is, in my opinion, another opportunity for Canada to show the way, to show leadership, so we can encourage other countries throughout the world to do the same thing. We can encourage others to sit down with Ukraine and talk about how they can also participate in open and free access to Ukraine's economy, and have it reciprocated.

I see this not as just another free trade agreement. I see it as Canada's opportunity to, once again, show leadership in this world. That is why being the first country to modernize its agreement with Ukraine, I think, is so incredibly important.

As the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader said previously, I really hope we can get this past the finish line here, in the Senate, and with the Governor General by Christmas, so we can show that leadership not only to Ukraine but also throughout the world.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, certainly, I appreciate the impassioned speech. We know that Canada has given significant support to Ukraine. Thus far, it is almost $10 billion, I think, by the addition.

One of the concerns I have is the way that Canada appears, in my mind, in spite of the incredible “woke” legislation that is woven into this free trade agreement.

Another concern is this. Why would we negotiate a free trade agreement now when we have given Ukraine significant amounts of money? Why do we need a free trade agreement with a country that is at war? To me, that puts it in a significant and difficult bargaining position.

I believe that Canada is taking advantage of Ukraine with a free trade agreement at this time. I really wonder if the Liberal government has given any thought to that.

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

I would make the comment that we were non-partisan a second ago.

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

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

We certainly were, Mr. Speaker. I have to admit that I did not see that question coming.

At the very outset of the question, by referring to “woke” words in this agreement, the member is wanting to politicize this. Let us remember, and I hope the member who made those comments reflects on this, that this is wording that was agreed to by both Canada and Ukraine. To be critical of this legislation and the words in it, you are also being critical of Ukraine and its position on this.

I know other members are kind of heckling, but I hope it is only that individual member's perspective on it, and it is not that of the member for Abbotsford's, whom I hear talking back there. I really hope this is a one-off in the Conservative Party. If this is the way Conservatives are going in terms of how they are going to ultimately vote on this, I am absolutely floored.

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

I am just the chair occupant. Members are using the word “you” in the debate we are having today.

The hon. member for Beauport—Côte‑de‑Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix.

[Caroline Desbiens, Bloc, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciate the comments of my colleague opposite.

Given the situation that Ukraine will be in if this war ends, and we do want it to end, I would like to know whether my colleague would support simply consolidating the agreements signed since 2017 to facilitate Ukraine's reconstruction.

Should we not simplify these free trade agreements so that Ukraine can get back on its feet quickly and go back to what it was before, a prosperous country with which we enjoyed an extremely pleasant and harmonious trade relationship?

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

Mr. Speaker, this is one thing I found to be so remarkable about the question that came from my Conservative colleague just moments ago. He basically said that we have already given Ukraine all this money, and then he asked why we need to have a free trade agreement with it and if we think it really cares about free trade right now. I think I am being generous in my paraphrasing of that, but the reality is that I am convinced Ukraine wants this in place. Ukraine wants to make sure that when it does win the war, it has the resources to hit the ground running. That is why we put these agreements in place now. To the member's question whether we should consolidate and do other things to make that even more effective and happen faster, absolutely, we should.

I am still in awe of the question the member for Cumberland—Colchester asked me. I am perplexed by where Conservatives are going with this, and it is not what I was expecting. Yes, we need to be there for Ukraine. We need to make it as easy as possible for our trade agreements with it to work as effectively and efficiently as possible so that when it does win the war, it can rebuild that country very quickly.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague spoke about how important this agreement is, and there is a lot in it that I will be speaking about later this evening, but this trade agreement, I understood, was negotiated and completed in April. Therefore, if this is such important legislation, and I believe it is, why did it take the government so long to bring it forward and then to bring it forward to the House, which has not even allowed us an opportunity to speak to our caucuses about this particular legislation?

If it wants the support and wants everybody to be on board, why did it take so long to bring this forward in such an irresponsible manner?

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

Mr. Speaker, my understanding is that, yes, the agreement was negotiated in April, but it was not signed until September. It was just signed, and here we are in October with the legislation.

Should we always look for opportunities to be faster at things? Absolutely, but I would not, by any means, say this has been a slow process.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C‑57, which seeks to ratify the free trade agreement between Canada and Ukraine. I would like to share some thoughts on this agreement and why it deserves our attention and our careful review.

First, it is important to remind the House that Canada has traditionally been a defender of democratic values, human rights and the rule of law internationally. Since its independence in 1991, Ukraine has made significant progress in these areas. Canada has always maintained an amicable relationship with Ukraine. Canada was the first western country to recognize its sovereignty. In reviewing this agreement, we can see that we have an opportunity to strengthen our commitment to these fundamental values and provide meaningful support to Ukraine. That being said, we reaffirm our solidarity with Ukraine in its quest for stability, prosperity and liberty.

Under the circumstances, the best way for Canada to help Ukraine in its battle against the Russian invasion is to enable it to end its dependence on Russian energy. One way to do that is to maintain and improve trade with Ukraine, and energy should be a big part of that. We are in favour of reducing obstacles to free trade, especially in the context of trade relations with a country that shares our values.

The Conservatives initiated free trade negotiations with Ukraine. The Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement finally came into effect in 2017. That agreement was a win-win for both Canada and Ukraine. When two democracies help each other, the whole world wins. Exporting our natural resources is a golden opportunity for Canada to raise its profile internationally. Now more than ever, producing and exporting our liquefied natural gas, or LNG, would enable Canadians to create wealth while also greatly assisting Ukraine's efforts to liberate itself from Russia's influence.

Canada is privileged to possess resources that are prized around the world. One of those resources is LNG. This energy source is a transition fuel that offers excellent energy efficiency and has less environmental impact than the other energy sources the world is trying to distance itself from. Common sense dictates that we should use this resource to our advantage and allow our allies, such as Ukraine, to benefit from its abundance.

Unfortunately, for ideological reasons, the government refuses to take advantage of this strategic resource that would help our citizens, our allies, and the health of our planet. In my own riding, a major LNG project never saw the light of day because of the Liberal government's anti-energy attitude. The absence of strong signals in favour of LNG development in Quebec and Canada is preventing Canadians from accessing much-needed funds and is forcing our allies to rely on dictatorships for their energy supply.

The most effective way for Canada to support our Ukrainian allies in their fight against the Russian invasion is by offering them a way out of their dependence on Russian gas and oil. Ratifying Bill C‑57 is paramount to continuing our support for democracy, freedom and the rule of law internationally.

Not only is this trade relationship important for preserving our values in the world, but this relationship also benefits our Canadian businesses. For example, our auto sector can expand its market by exporting its products to another country without facing too many obstacles.

Our trade relationship is important for ensuring that we have access to agricultural products. Our imports of agricultural products allow for a safe supply of quality products. What is more, to help our local farmers, eliminating obstacles for farm machinery and equipment helps our farmers get access to more efficient tools at a lower cost.

This agreement is part of our long and enduring commitment to the Ukrainian people. The Ukrainian communities in Canada play a very important role in our society. We have the second-largest Ukrainian diaspora in the world. Some 1.3 million Canadians of Ukrainian origin live here and enrich our culture and our economy.

This agreement is part of the Canadian strategy of advocating free trade. We adopted this strategy to promote the economic development of our businesses and to make them more competitive. Unfortunately, when the government and its Bloc allies decide to become anti‑energy and stand in the way of our Canadian producers, it makes it impossible for our country to unlock the full potential of our abundant natural resources. We have to be realistic. It is true that our diverse exports and imports with Ukraine are important. However, the thing that would set us apart and truly help Ukraine in its war effort is our liquefied natural gas.

Anti-energy measures hurt our economy and prevent us from being the energy allies we should be, but the carbon tax is also a barrier for businesses here at home. The additional burden of a tax that directly and indirectly affects all goods circulating in Canada gives imported goods a considerable advantage over our local products, which are overtaxed compared to goods entering our country.

We need to be aware of the important role Canada has to play on the international stage. Although the Liberal-Bloc-NDP coalition may not see it, what sets us apart is our natural resources. This free trade agreement is an excellent opportunity for Canada to set itself apart on the world stage. We should be proud of our environmental standards in energy production. My colleagues need to understand that we have an excellent opportunity to take action for Canada, Ukraine and the environment.

We are proud to support Ukraine in its efforts to repel the Russian invasion. It is our duty to stand up against any forces that threaten democracy, freedom and the rule of law. We are pleased to welcome Ukrainian refugees who have had to flee their homeland because of the war in their country. By taking a favourable approach to Ukraine and supporting their economy, while promoting our own, we continue to support an ally that is important to us and to the free world, especially since by improving our relations with the Ukrainian state, we are demonstrating our commitment to Ukrainian communities here in Canada.

As parliamentarians, it is our duty to examine this bill and ensure that it is drafted in the best possible way to maximize the benefits of such an agreement. When a democracy is under threat, we must all rally behind it to defend the values and principles that unite us. Supporting the Ukrainian economy is part of our collective war effort to promote democracy around the world. This free trade agreement with Ukraine is part of Canada's multi-faceted support for Ukraine.

In principle, Bill C‑57 appears to be in line with Canadian values and principles. We will have to work hard as parliamentarians to ensure that a free trade agreement between Ukraine and Canada has the greatest possible positive impact on both our countries. Conservatives will always work to improve the interests of Canadians.

We are also committed to helping our Ukrainian allies, especially given the difficult situation they are facing in their conflict with Russia. This assistance takes many forms, and if, after study, this free trade agreement is beneficial to both Canada and Ukraine, we should support it.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I heard a lot more in the hon. member's speech about what Canada could sell to Ukraine than about what it means to Ukraine to have access to the Canadian market and have the benefit of more customers to help it develop its economy through the sale of goods, like steel and tools. It has done great work on rolling stock for railways.

Can the hon. member talk about the opportunity we are giving Ukraine to sell into our market to help it develop its market?

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think this is going to require some meaningful discussion, because we need to come up with one of the best agreements, one that benefits both Canada and Ukraine.

I noticed something. I know that our liquefied natural gas would fill a need for Europeans and Ukrainians. However, the government is preventing it from being exported. Seeing the unfortunate situation the Ukrainians are in, I think Canada is well placed to help them on that front.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we are in favour of the principle of this agreement. The Bloc Québécois is also an ally on the Ukraine issue. We agree on that. However, I would like to hear my colleague's views on a missed opportunity in this agreement, namely, bringing multinational corporations back under government authority rather than putting them on the same footing as governments.

My colleague talked about oil companies and large energy corporations. There is a risk of lawsuits with these large multinationals. In short, putting them on the same footing and not restoring this inequality means that a state could become their puppet. The risk of a lawsuit is not trivial. I would like to know what my colleague thinks.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think that the missed opportunity was not to have supported liquefied natural gas projects, which would now be better for the environment. We are in a transition and I think that, on the other side of the Atlantic, in Europe, countries like Ukraine are still wondering why Canada will not allow natural gas exports.

We can do it. We are a nation of natural resources, and we are the best at harnessing and developing them. The technology is improving day by day.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech and to the question from the Bloc Québécois.

The Bloc Québécois supports the free trade agreement with Ukraine, but opposes the export of liquefied natural gas to Europe. Does my colleague think that the Bloc Québécois is trying to have it both ways?

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think that the Bloc Québécois should be a little more realistic and realize what is going on in Canada and Quebec, especially with the carbon tax. I think that people in my riding are pretty unhappy about inflation, and the carbon tax is part of it.

I think that party has some serious soul-searching to do. I am not sure it is the party of the regions anymore.

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

Mr. Speaker, we are here to talk about a really important piece of legislation, but if you will permit me, I just want to take 30 seconds to mention a constituent I made a promise to. She is actually one of your constituents, but we may have some crossover in the days ahead with redistribution.

Mary Fraser is a resident of south Berwick, and I had the privilege of going to her 100th birthday at the Waterville fire hall. I promised not only that I would wish her a happy birthday, and I know you have done the same, Mr. Speaker, but that I would make sure it gets into Hansard so it will forever be on the record here. A big round of applause for her. We love Mary, and I hope she is able to watch this at home when her family takes a clip of it.

We are here to debate Bill C-57, an act to implement the 2023 free trade agreement between Canada and Ukraine. Behind me are my colleagues from Etobicoke Centre and Outremont, who are champions for Ukraine. I want to take a few moments to recognize their work here in Parliament on behalf of all Canadians, especially those of Ukrainian descent. I thank my colleagues for their outstanding work.

Bill C-57 is very simple. Its objective is to implement the free trade measures established between Canada and Ukraine. The first free trade agreement with Ukraine was signed in 2017 and included goods but not services. Now, services are also included as part of Bill C-57 along with the measures established between the two countries.

We have talked a lot in the House about the challenges that Ukraine is facing as a result of Russia's illegal invasion and about the need to support Ukraine and its people in defending their country.

We have talked a lot about the war and Canada's contribution. I was a bit disappointed by the comments from the member for Cumberland—Colchester, who referenced this legislation as being “woke”. That was disappointing to hear. This piece of legislation is simply establishing a trade agreement and furthering the ties we have between our two countries. Is he suggesting that the Government of Ukraine is woke? I do not think so. That government has been on the front lines of defending democracy. The member needs to clarify his comment at some point in this House. Hopefully he will have the opportunity.

This bill would extend measures that matter in the economic ties between Canada and Ukraine. It is what our two governments have been working on to advance. I know that members of this House who have large Ukrainian diasporas in their ridings are certainly proud to stand here and support this legislation. In fact, it would be great if all members of this House could agree on a way to fast-track this legislation. This should not be very controversial.

I hear some members of the NDP are calling for that. They believe in that principle. It is not within my purview, but perhaps the House leaders will have a conversation and we will not have to spend a lot of days on this bill and can advance it to committee for further study. Ultimately, when it comes from committee, we can get it to the Senate as soon as possible. Even better, and I have seen it before, is if the House leaders agree to send it right to the Senate. That would be even better, especially if we believe in this piece of legislation.

I am proud to be the chair of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food here in Parliament and, as such, I think I need to take a moment to emphasize the importance of Canada's agricultural ties with Ukraine.

The former hon. member for Malpeque, Wayne Easter, called me a couple of weeks ago from Ukraine. He is there on a mission, working with potato farmers. This is being funded by a number of initiatives in Canada and the United States. He is there with other members. Of course, Wayne has a great history in agriculture. That is but one of the many examples where we share really deep ties between our two countries.

This agreement covers services, but we should also use it as an opportunity to highlight the deep agricultural ties between our two countries. The agriculture committee had the opportunity back in the spring, either this spring or in 2022, to have the Ukrainian minister of agriculture join us to talk about the challenges of the Russian infantry, which was laying land mines in the farmers' fields in Ukraine. I am proud to say on the record that Wayne and others are over there helping to build those ties.

There have been many other opportunities to build ties between Canada and Ukraine, particularly in terms of research on various methods related to seeds and different types of agricultural products. This is a good opportunity for Canada and Ukraine to continue their hard work.

Something I would encourage the government and all members of Parliament to reflect on is how they can contribute in that conversation as well.

We have talked a lot about the war effort and the support Canada can provide on the front lines with military assistance, but the Ukrainian economy needs the money and the opportunity so Ukraine itself can continue to fund its war effort. Of course, I stand here as a member of Parliament, and I know my colleagues before us do. We want to continue to see the government be a very willing partner and to draw international support to continue Ukraine's fight for its sovereignty, its place and its homeland. At the same time, this agreement is yet another opportunity that would be in the vested interests of both of our countries.

Ukraine would have opportunities to send products here. We would have the opportunity to send expertise and support to Ukraine. It would strengthen both of our economies at a time when Ukraine's economy is in challenging times, given the circumstances that are happening. I will note that Canada is the first country to sign, or in this case, to modernize and continue to advance our integrated economic ties. We are the only country so far that has been able to do that. I think that speaks to the importance of how President Zelenskyy and his government view Canada as a stable partner, a friend and an ally with which to move forward.

I will use my remaining time to say that this is a very straightforward piece of legislation that would build upon the existing economic ties we have. It is supported by both governments, here and in Ukraine. It is supported by the diaspora and by Canadians of Ukrainian heritage across the country, who will be calling on all members of Parliament to support really straightforward legislation to advance this as soon as possible to drive economic opportunities for themselves here in Canada and for their homeland, where they have family and friends.

We have had certain pieces of legislation before the House over the last couple of weeks that I really thought would be “slam dunks”. I thought there would be an opportunity for real partisan consensus in the ability to move legislation forward. I have been proven wrong on that, and things I thought would be able to be advanced quickly were not. I call on all members of the House. I know that on this side of the House, we will have that consensus, and it sounds as though the NDP will have that consensus. I presume the Bloc will. I do not know about the Conservatives, based on the conversations I have heard in the chamber over the last couple of hours. I am happy to take questions, but I hope the Conservatives can clarify that they are in support of this very straightforward bill that matters for Ukraine and for our economic security as well, because it is just straightforward common sense.

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

I wish happy birthday to Mary as well. It is tough to be in two places at the same time, so it is good to know that the hon. member did make it to the birthday in Waterville that day.

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni, Taxation; the hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona, Foreign Affairs.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Edmonton Griesbach.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Mr. Speaker, today we have heard from the Conservatives, on the important piece of legislation, a free trade agreement with Ukraine, a very troubling pattern of information. They are a very well-scripted group. They often speak directly from what they have been told to say, but every once in a while they speak their mind, and what we heard earlier today was truly troubling, when the member for Cumberland—Colchester said that this agreement is too “woke” if it includes indigenous people and our declaration of support for the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It also speaks about our support for women. If these two principles are too woke for the Conservatives, then what exactly is it going to take for them to support this piece of legislation and to support all Canadians?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am at a loss for words because that is a tremendous question. I cannot answer for the Conservatives, my hon. colleague knows that, but I am glad that he put it on the record. I sat in the House today listening to the speech from the member for Kingston and the Islands, and when I heard the question that was asked by the member for Cumberland—Colchester as to whether or not he would support this woke legislation, I turned to the member for Etobicoke Centre and asked whether he had actually used the word “woke”. We did not believe it was true, but the record does show that is the case.

This is legislation that is referencing the ability to advance economic ties. As the member for Edmonton Griesbach mentioned, if there is some mention about UNDRIP, which is a Canadian law passed here; if there is some mention about the importance of indigenous Canadians, which is a constitutional responsibility we all have as Canadians; and if there is some mention about women's participation in the economy, all of that sounds fine and dandy to me, and we want to be able to move forward with this piece of legislation.

It is important that the Conservatives clarify whether or not the member for Cumberland—Colchester and his remarks stand for their party.