Debates of March 12th, 2026

An Act to Implement the Protocol on the Accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I just talked about Neepawa. If members want to see how efficient a plant can actually be at processing hogs, they can take a tour of the Brandon plant.

[An hon. member]

Have you?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, yes, I have taken the tour, right from where the hogs go in to where the final product goes out, and some of that product actually goes to Maple Leaf in Winnipeg. I understand the pork industry.

When we talk about world trade, what we are seeing today is a good example of a Prime Minister who has incredible connections. There are other world leaders who are anxious to actually meet with our Prime Minister. I think in terms of when he was down in Asia and he met with the President of the Philippines. Between the President and our Prime Minister, there was discussion about seeing whether we can achieve a trade agreement between Canada and the Philippines. There are all sorts of opportunities, whether it is coconut water coming from the Philippines to Canada or pork going to the Philippines from Canada. I hope I said that right: coconut water from the Philippines to Canada and pork from, ideally Manitoba but certainly Canada, to the Philippines. There are wonderful opportunities.

I take a look in terms of what happened with the Prime Minister's going to India. Do members know how much all of Canada would benefit by that, but in particular the Prairies? India wants energy. We have seen a government that is focused on delivering energy to the world and being a leader.

I would suggest that it is so critically important for those who are interested in following the debate on trade and the importance of trade to take a look at what the Canadian government is doing today and realize that, if we look at the world population and Canada's population, we make up about 0.5% of the world population. On the other hand, when we think of world trade, we actually make up about 2.5% of world trade. Those numbers alone clearly demonstrate why it is so important that Canada be engaged in trade. If we want to improve the conditions here in Canada, we must look at the impact that world trade has and continue to look for opportunities.

That is why the circumstances between Canada and the United States have heightened the importance that we not be as reliant on the United States. I love the United States. Americans and Canadians have had a super fantastic relationship for many years, but as the Prime Minister has indicated, things have changed and Canada needs to look at alternative ways we can provide that sovereignty and sense of security, so that Canada is in a better position going forward and cannot be intimidated by a much larger southern neighbour. That is a huge motivating factor.

People across the way, from the Conservative Party, will ask us to show them the deal. It is important for all of us to realize that we need to have a united front. We need to actually approach the United States in a united team Canada fashion, to be able to argue from a position of strength.

One of the ways we do that is by showing that we have trading opportunities in many other countries that want to increase trade with Canada. We have seen an example of that. If we went back generations, I would challenge whether other prime ministers did this 40 or 50 years ago. I would not go far back, but I can tell members that we have an aggressive agenda for building Canada strong. A major part of that, as we are talking about today, is world trade.

This is just one piece of legislation that deals with Northern Ireland and with England. These are trading partners we have had for a long time. Whether it is with trading partners like these or trading partners into the future, I believe there are opportunities. There is a heightened sense of awareness from exporters that want to be a part of world trade and export beyond the United States, and beyond even Canadian borders, obviously.

I had the opportunity to travel to the Philippines on a trade mission of sorts. There were literally hundreds of business representatives and entrepreneurs gathered in Manila to talk about trade opportunities between Canada and the Philippines. Another time when I was in the Philippines, we opened up the Agri-Food Office. That headquarters serves, I believe, 35 countries in the Pacific area for agri-food products. I had a tour of a grocery store in the Philippines that was highlighting Canadian-produced products—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. member for Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères is rising on a point of order.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Madam Speaker, I have been listening to the speech by the member opposite from the beginning. I am rising because we are supposed to be discussing Bill C-13, which deals with the United Kingdom's accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. However, most of the member opposite's speech has been focused on relations with the United States, the Philippines—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. member knows full well that the Chair gives a lot of latitude when it comes to the nature of the speeches that can be given, and the parliamentary secretary has referred several times to the agreement and to trade with the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland. I would therefore ask the hon. parliamentary secretary to resume his speech.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I understand and respect the comments, but I think we need to take a look at the larger picture, which is why I also made reference to one of the greatest exports Canada has. The member represents a Quebec riding, and for the province of Quebec, one of the biggest exports, which I referenced, is gold. Gold is produced in virtually all regions of the country. It is one of the biggest trading things that go towards this particular agreement.

This is important, because when we talk about trade agreements, as we have today and as we did with respect to Indonesia yesterday, I think it is widely accepted that members understand the true value of trade, which is why there is support for legislation of this nature. I would hope that we would continue to have that sort of support going forward. I really do believe that Canada needs to be and should continue to be a leader when it comes to trade.

The European Union and the U.K. are very strong allies of Canada, but we should also be looking at creating relationships with other nations, whether it is G20 countries, countries in Asia, or many more. Part of the G20 includes countries from Asia. We need to look at ways in which we can enhance trade opportunities, because that means a stronger, healthier Canada that is able to provide the type of jobs we want into the future. It is good for Canada to get trade agreements passed through the House of Commons.

It was a pleasure to share a few thoughts on the issue.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC]

Madam Speaker, I listened intently to the member for Winnipeg North speak about the Canadian pork industry. I think he raises some valid points, but unfortunately he left out the real and pressing issues that Canada has with the United Kingdom as they relate to non-tariff and trade irritants specifically for the exportation of pork.

The Library of Parliament outlines that Britain exported 5.6 million dollars' worth of pork to Canada in 2023, 9.1 million dollars' worth in 2024, and 3.6 million dollars' worth in the first half of 2025. Meanwhile, Canada exported no pork to the U.K. in 2023, 75,000 dollars' worth in 2024 and only 122,000 dollars' worth in 2025.

The Canadian Pork Council outlines that the reasons it cannot export to the U.K. are trichinosis testing and animal production and processing rules that prevent the great pork producers in the member's riding and across the province of Manitoba from doing so.

Why did the Prime Minister not use this opportunity to remove those trade irritants and include them in Bill C-13 so Canadian pork producers in Manitoba could sell more product on the international market?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, Canada, like the United States, has a different process for pork processing, which has proven to be very difficult in getting our pork to market in the EU and the U.K. That is well established. It was there prior to the current government, and it is something that, I would suggest, is a work in progress.

While we work on that area, it is important to consider Japan and other countries, such as the Philippines, because this increases the overall export of pork. That is what we want. If members were to check with HyLife in the community of Neepawa, for example, they would find that its biggest concern is actually Japan. There are literally hundreds of jobs in Neepawa through HyLife, and its interest is in Japan.

Yes, we have some concerns in Europe in regard to pork, just like the United States has concerns—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. member for Riding Mountain is rising on a point of order.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Madam Speaker, the member is talking about a different country altogether, versus the actual—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

I understand. I think the hon. member was trying to make a comparison.

The hon. member for Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am going to dig a little deeper into the subject I touched on in my point of order earlier. The Chair did not consider it a point of order, so I imagine this will be fine as a point of debate.

In his speech, the member talked almost exclusively about our relationship with the United States and with the Philippines. He actually had a lot to say about the Philippines. I think it was the topic of almost half of his speech. Honestly, I have nothing against the Philippines. My partner is from the Philippines. However, Bill C‑13 is about the United Kingdom's accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.

The member makes endless speeches in Parliament. He talks about all kinds of things, but I get the impression he is not very familiar with the subject we are discussing today because he did not talk about it. Here is my question for him. Maybe, if he is unfamiliar with a subject, he could give other members who are familiar with it an opportunity to talk because he gets so many opportunities to talk.

What are his thoughts on that?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I do not know if the member is trying to hurt my feelings, but I thought I was very clear. There is a very strong and healthy relationship between the United Kingdom and Canada. I highlighted what I thought was a very important industry from which Canada has benefited immensely, which is the export of gold. If the member wants to challenge that thought, he is welcome to do that. If he wants to highlight other industries, he is welcome to do that also.

Yesterday we talked about the Indonesia trade agreement. There were discussions in regard to an area of trade that I am very much interested in, that being pork. I am surprised at the member opposite, because the pork industry is so important to the province of Quebec. I know that. I would have thought he knew that and would have been interested in hearing me talking about pork, because it matters in Quebec as it matters in the province of Manitoba.

The general gist of my discussion was to talk about how important trade is to Canada. Trade means jobs, whether in B.C., Manitoba, Quebec or Halifax, or up north. That is what we should be talking about: the principles of it. We all know, care and understand the benefits of the EU—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Riding Mountain.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Madam Speaker, my colleague has brought up a lot of good points about trade, but I am wondering whether, in the trade agreements, there is any commitment to get our own house in order as a nation.

The member referred to the plant in Neepawa. The biggest limiting factor for that plant is the requirement to have veterinarians and to maintain the Canadian national standard. We can make all the promises in the world, travel all over the world and say what we have for sale, but if we cannot get our own house in order, there are big problems. The Canadian agriculture industry has hit these roadblocks several times in the past, putting in question how much of a reliable supplier we are.

In this agreement, is there any commitment to analyze our own Canadian system to help veterinarians and to get our own production systems in line?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, within this specific agreement, the short answer would be no, not that I am aware of, but I could be wrong on that. At the end of the day, when we look at trade as a whole and what the member is referring to, this is an issue about which I have had discussions with both the Government of Manitoba, in particular the minister of immigration, and federal ministers. Veterinary services play a very important role in our agricultural community.

A question was asked about why we cannot export more pork to Europe. Part of that is about trying to break down some of the barriers, and we are not alone. The pork industry in the United States has the same issue. How do we try to continue to produce in a way that we are very familiar with and work with, and get the EU and the U.K. to accept the pork as we are producing it? That is a challenge in—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

Questions and comments.

The hon. member for Québec.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec Centre, QC]

Madam Speaker, I was very interested to listen to our colleague's speech and also to compare it to what we heard yesterday on the topic of Indonesia, when we heard some Conservative voices saying that we were spending or wasting too much of members' time talking about trade.

Does the member believe we are spending too much time in the House investing in trade relationships and building a stronger economy?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question from my colleague because I really and truly believe he, as do I and members of the Liberal caucus, understands the true value of trade. We heard that yesterday during debate on another trade agreement, the Indonesia trade agreement, when Conservatives stood and said there is such a small amount of trade between Canada and Indonesia. I believe they support the agreement, but they were downplaying it because of the amount of trade.

What we are talking about with that particular agreement is billions and billions of dollars in merchandise trade today and how we can continue to enhance that. We want to trade with the world because that is how we are going to build a stronger and healthier Canada and provide jobs into the future.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, this debate exposes Parliament's limited ability to amend treaties. Amendments can be made only to the bill and not to the treaty itself.

In the United States, the U.S. Congress grants negotiating mandates, making it more difficult for negotiating teams to conclude unsatisfactory agreements. In Canada, the executive branch acts alone, without any parliamentary oversight. In most industrialized countries, parliaments adopt treaties. This forces executive branches to maintain an ongoing dialogue and perhaps even reorient negotiations. In other words, Canada has a democratic deficit.

I am running out of time, so I will ask my question. Does my colleague not think that we should review how Canada and Parliament approach treaties, instead of allowing the executive branch to act alone?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, the short answer is no. The Bloc has tried to bring forward legislation—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

We need to resume debate.

The hon. member for Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke has the floor.

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

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask for unanimous consent to split my time with the member for Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

It is agreed?