Pat O'Brien

[Summit Of The Americas, March 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the official opposition, for the most part, is supportive of our efforts in the FTAA.

However, I want to take up my colleague's last point about softwood lumber. The hon. member says the government has not done enough to make the Americans aware. With all due respect, I think that is wrong. Surely my colleague is aware that the Prime Minister of Canada raised this personally with the President of the United States. It was one of the first issues they discussed. Surely my colleague is aware that the Minister for International Trade raised this issue with U.S. trade representative Robert Zoellick at their very first meeting. Surely my colleague is aware that American consumer groups, American senators and American congressmen are calling on their government not to do what it has done three times and launch a countervail action against Canada.

Canada simply does not control what the Americans do. With all due respect to my colleague, it is incorrect to say that the Americans are not aware of the facts. The Americans know the facts. Some choose to ignore those facts even when the courts rule them to be offside on the issue. Frankly, I do not know what else the government could have done to make Americans aware.

[Summit Of The Americas, March 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the leader of the Conservative Party. I must say I think a number of us in the House might want to reread the economic policies of the party that the hon. member leads and of the party I am a member of. I recall prime ministers by the name of Macdonald and Diefenbaker who were hardly great free traders. Even my colleague opposite in the Alliance might benefit by a little rereading of Canadian history with respect to the positions of the two parties.

My question for the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party is this. When his government was in power and la Francophonie summit was held in Quebec City and then the G-7 meeting in Toronto, were the premiers of those two provinces invited to have the full blown participation he is advocating now for the separatist premier of Quebec, Mr. Landry?

[Summit Of The Americas, March 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member referred to rhetoric from the government side. That is interesting, given her speech.

I would like to hear her thoughts on the fact that a former colleague of hers, Nelson Riis, is saying that the NDP has no place being in the streets in Quebec City as an elected party, that it has a duty to participate in the democratic process.

I would also like her views on the speech that Mr. Tony Blair made in the House when he said:

It is time I think that we started to argue vigorously and clearly as to why free trade is right. It is the key to jobs for our people, to prosperity and actually to development in the poorest parts of the world.

The leader of the UN, Kofi Annan, made similar comments recently where he put a figure of $100 billion that could go to the poorer nations of the world through a liberalized globalized trade.

Could the hon. member drop her comments about government rhetoric and address the comments of her former colleague, Mr. Riis; the labour prime minister of the U.K., Mr. Blair; and the secretary general of the United Nations, Mr. Annan?

[Summit Of The Americas, March 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, in another life I too was involved in negotiations. I would like to ask my question of the Bloc Quebecois collectively, but I will direct it to the member for Joliette even though similar comments were made by his colleague, the member for Mercier.

The Minister for International Trade and the Prime Minister have made it clear that they are looking toward the greatest transparency possible. Is the member for Joliette suggesting that we actually release these texts unilaterally without the agreement of our trading partners? Is that what he is seriously suggesting? Would he not consider that highly irresponsible?

[Summit Of The Americas, March 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I listened in amazement to what my colleague said. I have heard her raise the point about transparency before as if to suggest that there has been no consultation by the government.

The hon. member should consider the following. The issue has been raised at the standing committee as recently as today. A colleague and I were at two different meetings of the standing committee on this very topic.

There have been extensive meetings with the Minister for International Trade with NGOs, including the province of Quebec. There have been ongoing consultations with the Minister for International Trade and his provincial counterparts. Our positions are on the website, the first time ever that such a thing has been done. The minister has committed to raise the need for greater transparency at the upcoming meeting in April in Buenos Aires.

I put a question in committee earlier today and I put it again on the floor of the House of Commons. I would like to give the member an opportunity to respond to it. Could she give us a specific example of any trade negotiation involving Canada that has been more transparent or even as transparent as the current one?

[Lumber Industry, March 23rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, it is really incredible for me to hear the member make that kind of assertion. He knows full well that the minister has gone across the country meeting with his provincial counterparts. He knows full well that the minister this very week met with representatives of the lumber industry from all regions of Canada.

That kind of assertion is not helpful. I think the member ought to bear that in mind as we seek to continue to have a united consensus in Canada.

[Lumber Industry, March 23rd, 2001]

One of my colleagues says name one. The minister has personally met with trade representative Zoellick and very clearly outlined the Canadian position.

The government has an excellent captain on this file. It is the Minister for International Trade.

[Lumber Industry, March 23rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I like my colleague's analogy. Quite clearly the captain who has been playing very efficiently at this game is the minister himself.

As I said earlier, the minister has met repeatedly with representatives of the provincial industries right across Canada.

[Lumber Industry, March 23rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to my colleague, he asked if the minister would accept the consensus.

The minister has led the effort to reach the consensus. The minister met this week with lumber interests from B.C., from the maritimes and from Quebec. He has met repeatedly with his counterparts at the provincial level. The Minister for International Trade has been the leader in building the consensus in Canada that we are insisting on free trade in softwood lumber.

[Lumber Industry, March 23rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister for International Trade has been quite clear that the goal of the Canadian government, and indeed of everyone involved in the lumber industry in all regions of Canada, is free trade in softwood lumber.

Any action would have to be launched by the American government. It has done this three times in the past to no avail. The minister has been very clear on that. We will await the decision of the American government.