Art Eggleton

[Softwood Lumber, June 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we got out of this agreement with the United States secure access for our industry for five years, something we have never had before in any sector, including this one.

The first people on the line who said they wanted this arrangement was the industry. In getting this arrangement we have to sort out how the allocations will occur within the country.

We are listening to everybody. We will come up with a system that will be fair and equitable, on that will maximize our access of that market to the United States.

[Trade, June 11th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, new international business investment is at a record level in Canada. It has doubled in the last decade. That means one in ten jobs in this country is as a result of the flow of international investment. In fact, 50 per cent of our total exports, 75 per cent of our manufactured exports, flow out of that international investment.

It is a positive message for Canadians. We want to get more of it. We have a high priority and we have a lot that attracts people to Canada, because we are a gateway into NAFTA, a market of 370 million people. We have the productivity, we have the workforce, the competitive wages. We have the infrastructure, the energy supplies. We have all the things we need, including compatibility of technology through our metric system, to attract people to invest in Canada, not to mention our very solid quality of life.

[Trade, May 31st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the agreement on softwood lumber was signed yesterday by our ambassador in Washington and a United States deputy trade representative. It reflects the policy I announced early in April with respect to this matter. It will go into effect on April 1.

This is an unprecedented agreement. It provides for secure access for a period of five years. It has in writing the agreement of the United States government not to pursue trade remedies in that period of time on the issue of softwood lumber. It is a position our industry strongly supports. It helps to preserve its export market into the United States. That in turn helps to preserve thousands of jobs.

In fact, if an amount of lumber which is equivalent to the average over the last three years is exported, not a nickel in fees will be paid. It will be a free flow. Last year was a record year. The industry could go to over 90 per cent of the amount and still have it as a free flow. Any fees that are paid over that will be staying in Canada. They will not be going to the United States treasury.

[Cuba, May 30th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, it comes as no surprise that a letter was sent. The Helms-Burton law provided for that, although I must say it is only one letter. The State Department in the U.S. says there may well be more letters. These letters do not even say exactly what they will do. They say the guidelines are coming later.

We are still protesting this legislation. We believe it is fundamentally wrong. It is a unilateral action of the United States plying its foreign policy extraterritorially on Canada and other countries. That is fundamentally wrong and we will continue to protest under NAFTA, as the European Union is doing under the World Trade Organization. We are also examining our options in terms of our own domestic law to protect Canadian interests and Canadian companies doing lawful business in Cuba.

[Trade, May 16th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot agree with the preamble to the question.

The government is working not only through NAFTA but through the World Trade Organization to help improve the rules based system. The government is committed to liberalization in trade and a rules based system. It will continue whether it is with the working groups, the WTO, the OECD or whatever other vehicle, to bring that about.

[Trade, May 16th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we have been working with a trade remedies working group that involves our partners from the United States and Mexico toward doing the very things that the hon. member has talked about.

We are fully committed to dealing with the reform of trade remedy laws to cut down on the use of countervail and anti-dumping duties so that we can have a free trade system. That is our position and that is what we continue to work toward.

[Free Trade Agreement, May 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we certainly are pursuing the question of the steel industry to try to bring about an end to the anti-dumping measures that are applied, as we do in any other case in which there are trade irritants.

It is worth noting that the greatest trade relationship of any two countries in the world is between Canada and the United States. There is $1 billion a day exchanged between our two countries, which means a lot of jobs and a lot of economic growth in this country. Ninety-five per cent of that trade is hassle free with no problems at all. A very small percentage still needs attention and it is getting the attention of this government.

[Free Trade Agreement, May 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has been pursuing with vigour the matter of trade remedies with our partners in the NAFTA. That was the basis on which the NAFTA agreement was signed and we have honoured the agreement to pursue these matters.

A report will be coming shortly from the trade remedies group. Progress is being made, but there is still a lot more work to be done in achieving our goals within the NAFTA. We will continue to work toward those goals of removing trade remedy law applications so that we can have a true free trade system.

[Trade, May 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, as question period draws to a close, I am happy to bring some good news. Over the last three years since the government took office exports have increased by 40 per cent.

Last year the trade surplus was some $28 billion. Trade has gone up from 26 per cent to 37 per cent of GDP in just four years. The future also indicates that there will continue to be big increases in export and trade investment.

That means that the government is delivering on its promise of jobs and growth because for every billion dollars of new trade 11,000 jobs are created for Canadians.

[Cuba, May 9th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we are watching the situation very carefully. We are into a consultation process with the United States at this point in time, and depending on how that consultation process goes we will proceed with this matter further within the NAFTA framework.

We want to protect Canadian law, we want to protect Canadian interests and Canadian businesses that are legally doing business in Cuba.

We will continue to oppose the measures of the Helms-Burton law and will look at different options and ways to protect Canadian interests.