Pat O'Brien

[Softwood Lumber, April 26th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, first, let me be clear that the government welcomes the Weyerhaeuser decision to challenge the U.S. dumping determination. We all know that the U.S. actions are illegal and punitive.

The government will continue our two track policy of trying to engage the Americans in good faith negotiations while at the same time pursuing our legal avenues at NAFTA and the WTO.

As for the advocacy campaign the member refers to, he is sitting beside his trade critic and maybe the trade critic could tell him about the year long advocacy campaign in the United States of the government.

[Lumber Industry, April 26th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, as I said the other day, the Bloc can demand immediate action as often as it wants, but the point is that there are serious considerations under proposal from all the provinces, including the province of Quebec. They have to be reviewed.

The government is taking stock of the situation. In due course it will take a decision, but it is not about to make a bad decision just to please the Bloc Quebecois.

[Lumber Industry, April 26th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Human Resources Development has pointed out repeatedly, every possible way to assist the workers has been undertaken and indeed, additional steps are being reviewed.

The suggestions of the Government of Quebec are very interesting and helpful. We have had suggestions from other provinces as well. They are all under careful review. The government is considering what additional steps, if any, may be required. We are not about to take a precipitous decision, but we will act in a timely manner.

[Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act, April 26th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I listened in amazement to the hon. member and his conspiracy theory about why Canada is involved in trading with the most populace country in the world. It is unbelievable.

Yesterday his colleague from Calgary made similar silly accusations and charges. Quite frankly this displays an incredible ignorance of Canadian foreign policy.

Canada has had a one China policy since the days of the Trudeau government, through the Mulroney government of a different political stripe, and now on to the current government. To say that this is somehow driven because of some business connection the Prime Minister's son-in-law has in China or something, just boggles the imagination. It is an Alice in Wonderland kind of thinking.

Does the hon. member not know that Canada does not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan, does not recognize the Republic of China? Does the hon. member not realize that whether he likes it or not or whether I like it or not, and I do support it, China is now a member of the WTO? It has acceded to the WTO, as has Taiwan.

If we are going to continue trade with China and Taiwan, we must accept that reality. We must bring into line certain acts in order for us to accept the reality that China is now a member of the WTO. The member speaks as if he can somehow hold back the Chinese horde from getting into the WTO. He has to wake up and realize that China is a member of the WTO now. Does he not understand that?

[Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act, April 24th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague opposite with great interest. He asked a question about what would take precedence, NAFTA, WTO or FTAA. Clearly the cornerstone of the government's trade policy is WTO. Having said that, we proceed on three fronts. Recently we had a Canada-Costa Rica and a Canada-Chile bilateral in NAFTA or FTAA, which is a new initiative, then regionally in those areas, then of course multilaterally at the WTO. The WTO is the cornerstone, but softwood is a sad example unfortunately. They compliment each other and to some extent there is an overlap. We will be taking action at NAFTA and WTO. It is not a case of them being mutually exclusive oftentimes.

The member talked about the issue of possible assistance to certain industries such as textiles and so on. When I was in Shanghai representing the Minister for International Trade last June at the APEC trade ministers meetings, I had a chance to intervene for businesses in my own part of Ontario. Their problem was the bureaucracy they faced in China and the rules for doing business there.

My question for the member is this. Does the member not feel that by having China as a member of WTO it will force the Chinese to move toward respecting rules based trade and will that not benefit all Canadian companies?

[Softwood Lumber, April 23rd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the member can huff and puff all he wants, but it is not going to change the reality of the fact that, as I said earlier and as his own leader alluded to, there recently was a letter to the Prime Minister from the Quebec Lumber Manufacturers' Association.

Let me quote the other part that the leader of the Bloc Quebecois referred to. This is all the letter says: Slowness of the process will necessitate support to ensure that our companies remain financially stable.

That kind of support needs to be defined. There are a number of proposals on the table now. They are being carefully reviewed by the government.

[Softwood Lumber, April 23rd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure we will look for inspiration to the Bloc Quebecois when I am not sure they have consulted very closely with Quebec industry on these important matters.

There are a number of proposals that have come forward from the provinces. All provinces, including Quebec, have proposals on the table. There is close consultation with industry. There are a number of proposals that are under consideration right now. When the government has decided what the proper course of action is, it will act, but it will not do so precipitously no matter how many times the Bloc raises this question.

[Softwood Lumber, April 23rd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it is very clear who is responsible for this crisis and I think the hon. member would agree. It is the unfair punitive trade actions south of the border in the United States that is responsible. It is not the actions of this government or any of the provinces.

The Minister for International Trade and the Prime Minister have raised this issue with the American administration at every possible opportunity. Until the Americans are open to good faith negotiation on this, we will not see progress.

[Softwood Lumber, April 23rd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I would hardly consider the minister's attitude as casual when he has spent the amount of time he has consulting with all the provinces, including the province of Quebec, and the industry.

All options are on the table. The government is looking at current programs to see whether they are satisfactory. Possible other actions may be taken, but the government will not be rushed into a bad decision just to please the hon. member.

[Softwood Lumber, April 22nd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member ought to consult with industry in his home province. It has just written to the Prime Minister saying that for its part it wants to assure him and the responsible minister, the Minister for International Trade, of its continued and unrelenting support. Industry Quebec understands that the government is doing its job very well.