Sergio Marchi

[Trade, April 22nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it would be appropriate on earth day if the NDP renounced its membership in the flat earth society. Certainly that would be a contribution.

Canada through her trade deals has been able to energize our economy and also speak to high standards in those trade deals. In Chile, Canada and the Prime Minister were at the forefront in the creation of a civil society committee so that we can build an exciting project in the Americas and build it with all the groups that represent our society. Canada is at the forefront of—

[Softwood Lumber, April 21st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I had an opportunity to discuss the importance of this issue with the American minister.

We said that the government would take the opportunity to speak with the industry. I met with Quebec industry representatives seven days ago. Last Friday, we held a teleconference with national industry representatives and my department and, after assessing the situation with them, we are prepared to share our reaction with the Americans.

[Multilateral Agreement On Investment, March 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, where has the member been? A couple of weeks ago we had a six-hour parliamentary debate in this House. Not only did I participate, but members of Parliament from all sides of the House participated.

Secondly, we have had a parliamentary report.

Thirdly, we have given speeches publicly as well as at committee outlining the whole position of the government. Obviously he is the only member in the House who is not aware of the government's position.

[Multilateral Agreement On Investment, March 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal delegates had a great convention and are solidly behind our leader and our government.

There were two resolutions on the MAI. The first was to exclude culture from the negotiations for the purpose of Canadian culture, which is exactly what our government is doing. The second resolution was to ensure that we are engaging Canadians.

Again, the party is clearly in sync with its government.

[Hockey, March 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, at least the member should lace up his skates if he knew what he is talking about, but he does not.

We have talked to the hockey teams. We know that some of the municipal governments are building roads in the states and that there are subsidies and incentives. We pay most of our hockey players in American funds and our gate receipts are in Canadian dollars.

The development subsidies for municipalities, states, and federal governments are not covered by the WTO or by NAFTA. They only cover goods. In the future we are going to try to address development incentives for services. That is why—

[Hockey, March 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we said that members of our caucus set up a subcommittee on hockey. Thus far members of the Reform Party have refused to participate in the deliberations which address this subject.

I mentioned it to the member's leader and he acknowledged in a note yesterday that while he had asked me about the WTO and the NAFTA “I know we cannot address the development subsidies on services in both of those areas”. Nonetheless, he asked the question.

I said in the House that it is an issue of concern. However, we have to pick the right tool to fix the problem.

[Hockey, March 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the whole question of subsidies and trying to attract investment in the United States or Canada is much more complex than simply the hockey teams. It is an issue that is of concern to our teams but it also enters the whole world of investment.

When we are competing for investment we are also competing with what municipalities, states and provinces and national governments could do. It is not as clear cut as the member says because quite often he puts his skate guards on while he is skating.

[Hockey, March 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Canadian Heritage was saying that through the leadership of our caucus members, particularly the member of Parliament for Broadview—Greenwood, we have established a subcommittee to look into the entire game of hockey.

We have also had a number of discussions with a number of hockey teams in Canada with respect to the kinds of subsidies provided both from the municipal and federal perspective in the United States. That is important and is something the subcommittee will address.

No one is dismissing the issue. It will certainly be looked at and should be.

[Multilateral Agreement On Investment, March 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the government's position on the Multilateral Agreement on Investment with the OECD is very clear.

We are prepared to underwrite firms only when the Canadian objective is very clear. We have stated publicly in the House the importance of culture, social services, aboriginal issues and ethnic groups. On the matter of the standstill, we are willing—

[Multilateral Agreement On Investment, February 26th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I would thank the hon. member for her question. She is a passionate advocate for Canadian culture.

The very simple and straight answer to that question is that culture is non-negotiable. I have said many times in this House and outside the House the Canadian government would not sign an MAI if it were to include and involve Canadian culture.

I appeal to the NDP, if they care about the culture community, not to misrepresent the position and as well appeal to the Reform Party which is the only party in the House that is advocating opening the deal on culture, health care and social services. Let me reflect—