Julian Reed

[Asbestos Industry, May 4th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the secretary of state for health for France is meeting this afternoon with the Prime Minister. I am not privy to the agenda that the Prime Minister has, but I do know that discussions have been ongoing and will continue.

The province of Quebec has played a prominent role in co-operation with the Government of Canada and we will continue to work until this is satisfactorily resolved.

[Multilateral Agreement On Investment, April 30th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the most succinct answer is no.

Canada will only accept an MAI that provides a narrow interpretation of expropriation; that is, the historic interpretation as practised under Canadian law at the present time. We will not sign an MAI that goes beyond that interpretation.

[Criminal Code, April 29th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the concern expressed by my colleague across the way. It is the right and responsibility of every citizen of the country to be concerned and as fully informed as possible on all these issues.

My friend should understand that interaction between two countries goes both ways. There is the part of any agreement that resides in Canada and there is the other part that resides in the other country. In other words, when investment takes place part of that agreement is designed to protect our investment in other countries. It is a complete two way street.

My friend talked about consultation. I should like to read into the record part of a bulletin from the Canadian Conference of the Arts in terms of consultation. It points out that the minister has done much to make the process of negotiating trade agreements much more transparent to the Canadian people. He has ushered in a new era for negotiations where interested Canadians can inform themselves and participate in the shaping of ideas and positions Canada takes to the negotiating table.

In other words this process was initiated by my minister. It is well under way. The people of Canada are now able through mechanisms we have established to make their views known.

[Multilateral Agreement On Investment, April 29th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, now I can reply to the secrecy charge. The bulletin says “The minister has done much to make the process of negotiating trade agreements much more transparent to the Canadian public. The CCA has been most favourably impressed with the ease of access to Canadian trade negotiators and information about the process itself. The minister has ushered in a new era for these negotiations where interested Canadians can inform themselves and participate in the shaping of ideas and positions of Canada—”

[Multilateral Agreement On Investment, April 29th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I am able to refer to a ministerial statement issued by the OECD which states that the group will meet again in October of this year.

I should also point out that the Canadian Conference of the Arts has issued the following statement talking about my minister: “Minister Marchi has done much to make the process of—”

[Supply, April 28th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the process for negotiating the MAI had its roots in the processes for negotiating all the bilateral trade agreements that have gone on for years. The information was available through OECD from the very beginning but no reporters picked up on it, nobody ever looked at it until one draft appeared on the Internet last May. A draft is not a text, but it was interpreted as a text and what was not included at that time was a recognition that there was a list of reservations that not only Canada but every country in the OECD has included. Those are the bases for negotiation.

[Supply, April 28th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I hope my hon. friend did not misinterpret what I said. I told him not to give up his idealism in any way but over time recognize that politics is the art of the possible and what we try to do is head down a track or a road, and it is necessary to fight very often to get down that road.

I am glad my hon. friend accepts the principle of globalization. Representatives from the World Bank were in committee today. One of the things they said had to do with rural development and poverty which is a very serious concern of the World Bank. They recommended further worldwide liberalization of agricultural trade, a necessary condition for ensuring that countries can rely on international markets, rather than self-sufficiency policies, for their food security.

[Supply, April 28th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a comment about my young friend from Lac-Saint-Jean. I am very glad that he brought his chair back and will continue to sit in this House.

I was in the House when he expressed frustration and left with his chair. I saw the frustration of someone in his twenties whose idealism has not yet been tempered with the reality of age as it goes on.

I would just say to him that he should never give up his idealism. He should always keep it. As the years go on he will find that it is always tempered with reality.

It is frustrating to watch poverty in the world, seemingly on the increase. I do not think that child poverty can be isolated from poverty in general. It seems to me that if there is family poverty, then there is child poverty. The two go hand in hand. There is no magic formula for simply eliminating child poverty with the stroke of a pen or a chequebook.

I would also comment that some of the contents of this debate tend to argue against some of the very elements that are helping child poverty and helping the economies around the world. In order to get a perspective on that one has to look at history and the human condition that existed before countries began to interact with one another.

It was in the fifties that Canada began to interact in an official way with other countries with which it had been trading in the past, mostly under the colonial system that we were under at that time. Investment agreements began to be made in the 1950s. Up to now, as I understand it, there are 54 bilateral investment agreements that exist between Canada and other countries. Around the world there are 1,600 bilateral investment agreements.

The intent of the multilateral agreement on investment is very simple. It is to allow more countries to sing out of the same hymn book. Ultimately our hope is that once that framework is established the World Trade Organization, which represents 132 countries, will see the wisdom of operating under a common framework.

Canada does all right because our biggest trading partner is the United States. We understand each other's society and so on and we try to treat each other, even though there are glitches from time to time, with some fairness. That trade can go on without an MAI and without more agreements, but as other countries in the world, which are impoverished, want to raise their standard of living and want to put an end to their poverty, certainly we find that having some common rules among those countries will help them and will help us.

I also should point out that I think we all recognize that closed governments do not do well in the global village. Closed governments are failing very badly. I give the example of North Korea, a totalitarian communist government that has put walls around itself and almost chooses not to communicate at all with the rest of the world. Starvation and impoverishment there are incredible, to the extent that South Korea, its arch enemy, is now sending aid to North Korea to try in its own way to help North Korea through these crisis times.

I would suggest, on the other hand, that open governments overall are gaining. They are gaining in wealth and in economic base. Therefore they have a better opportunity to look after the impoverishment which exists to some extent in every country in the world. It exists in Canada, in France, in Europe, in Asia and so on. We recognize that.

The answer is not simply to throw cash at the problem. The answer is to provide a common denominator and an economic foundation so that countries can prosper and do well. That is why we seek these agreements, so that the rules can be established and so that a Canadian company is not afraid to invest in another country.

I bring in the example of what happened with the Nova Scotia firm that went into partnership with Aeroflot and the Russian government in the building of a hotel last year. Conflict arose because there is no MAI with Russia. There is no bilateral agreement with Russia.

As a result those people were left in the jungle on their own and they ran into serious trouble. That is a terrible detriment to a company or a potential investor who wants to go into another country and establish themselves there and in so doing help the economy, help jobs and help the growth of that country.

This interaction is a positive thing for all of us. Globalization represents empowerment for all countries if they will simply take it on. I know there are fears. There are fears expressed about cultural intrusion and so on. Every country that has been negotiating in the MAI has its own set of reservations and its own set of concerns. There is nothing wrong with that. There is nothing wrong with wanting to keep the cultural debate right out of the agreement. We have said that. We have made it very clear. We have said that if some other countries insist on having it in their agreement we will have a country specific reservation. That is a bottom line. There is no big deal.

Over the 40 or so years that these agreements have been made no company has come in and taken over the policies of this country. No multilateral organization has overwhelmed Canada. If anyone wants to see an example of industry and large organizations having an influence on the policy of a country, we only have to go to Washington and see how that government works. The dollar a year men in with companies actually construct policy that favours those companies. That does not happen in Canada. It has not happened and it will not happen in Canada as long as the people of this country see that it does not.

Our exports have increased tremendously since we started having agreements. As a result jobs have increased as well. We want that to continue but we want it to continue for us which is selfish but generous. We want it to continue for every country in the world, all the people in the world and we are most anxious to use all the tools we have to get rid of poverty, child poverty particularly.

[Trade, April 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the question. He has expressed a great deal of interest in this subject through his attendance in committee over recent months.

Canada has four free trade agreements and one of them is with Israel. As a result of the signing of that free trade agreement, trade has increased by 19%. I should also point out that goods produced in the West Bank and Gaza get equal treatment with goods produced in Israel.

[Asbestos Industry, April 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we will have to make that decision when we feel the time is appropriate. We do not feel the time is appropriate yet.