David Emerson

[Softwood Lumber, June 1st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the hon. member, who is from Atlantic Canada, realizes that Atlantic Canada is completely exempt from any protectionist measures going forward. He will have a very good time defending his position if this deal falls through.

Consultations are ongoing. We are exchanging documents with the United States. We are consulting with industry. We are going to get this deal right. This is not a make work program for lawyers, which is what those guys seem to want.

[Softwood Lumber, June 1st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, memories are short over on that side of the House because it was not very long ago when members of that party were prepared to accept a deal that was significantly inferior to the one we established in the recent negotiations.

[Cultural Diversity, May 31st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, cultural industries and cultural protection are not a negotiable item for the Government of Canada. We are committed. We continue to live by that commitment and we will continue to do so.

[Softwood Lumber, May 18th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think there is any greater deception on the people of Canada than the one that is being perpetrated by that member and that party.

That hon. member should have the courage to tell Canadians, to tell people employed in the softwood lumber industry that his strategy is a strategy for trade war. It is a strategy for litigation. It is a strategy for hundreds of millions of dollars to pay more lawyers. It is a strategy for uncertainty. It is a strategy for failure.

[Softwood Lumber, May 18th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, this government and our Ambassador to the United States do not need explicit instructions to stand up for Canada. That is his job. That is what he is doing.

The softwood lumber agreement shows that. It protects Canadian sovereignty, it protects provincial forest management policy. It creates stability in the industry. It causes American protectionists to not be able to do more of that litigation in the future.

[Softwood Lumber, May 17th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I may not know much about partisan politics, but I think know a thing or two about softwood lumber.

The government is dead set on protecting and improving NAFTA, not on destroying it. We have not given up our legal position. We are building on NAFTA. We are re-energizing NAFTA. We are re-energizing the softwood lumber industry in our country.

[Softwood Lumber, May 17th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, as I said to the previous question, we have not given up our legal rights. We have negotiated a settlement. We have protected Canadian forest policy. We have, if anything, protected Canadian sovereignty.

We have an agreement from the United States not to launch further aggressive trade actions. Those hon. members, with their cheap partisan politics, are inviting us to go back into a trade war, to go back into litigation, to go back into uncertainty, to go back into unemployment and to go back to destroying the softwood lumber industry.

[Softwood Lumber, May 17th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I think the lawyers were probably the ones who got him to ask the question.

Hundreds of millions of dollars have spent on legal fees in this action. This negotiated settlement was very much in the interests of the Ontario forest industry and the forest industry across the country.

We have not given up our legal rights. We have merely suspended the extraordinary challenge. It can be continued, if this negotiation is not completed.

[Softwood Lumber, May 17th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should be prepared to go to his community, where the softwood lumber industry has been on its back for the last five years, and say that he wants more years of litigation and that he wants to cast aside a negotiated settlement that will bring stability, job growth, investment and a sense of a future for the softwood lumber industry across Canada and in northern Ontario.

[Softwood Lumber, May 16th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I do not really think the softwood lumber industry in Canada nor the working families that are involved in the softwood lumber industry want this dispute to carry on for months and months, into the summer and into the fall. That is exactly what we are trying to avoid with this settlement. We are trying to restore predictability and certainty and we need to move ahead in a timely manner to ensure the softwood lumber industry in Canada is strong and competitive.