Christian Paradis

[Points of Order, September 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I took part in the debate yesterday on softwood lumber and was unpleasantly surprised to hear the hon. member for Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou say the following about the hon. member for Simcoe—Grey: “The hon. member for Simcoe—Grey rose earlier to say that this is a good agreement. She may be pretty when she blushes, but she was blushing from shame”.

Mr. Speaker, such remarks are sexist, condescending and unacceptable in this House.

I demand an apology from the member to this House.

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, September 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to my colleague's speech. It contained much speculation and raised many points. He refers to post-agreement or post-application demands. This is commendable, but we are now at the stage of confirming the agreement.

As for speculation, the hon. member seems to be saying that the Bloc Québécois acted responsibly, while the government did not. As we know, this is an out of court settlement. We will never have an out of court settlement that can equal the best judicial decision. Furthermore, if we have a judicial decision, there is no guarantee that it will be easily enforced. This is so true that Pierre-Marc Johnson himself said that if the judicial process continued, it could last not only a few months, but could go on until 2008-09, and that everything could be lost, simply because of a procedural matter.

What is irresponsible about the government using the arguments advanced by a leading international authority such as Pierre-Marc Johnson?

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, September 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, that is a lot of questions to answer in 15 seconds.

One thing is certain, the Government of Canada will make sure the industry is reimbursed in the coming weeks. That is what we should remember. The industry is at the end of its rope and the government is here to give it the help it has been asking for.

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, September 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague was there when the committees met this summer. Points were made at the first meeting. These points were respected by the Conservative government. We know the industry will be refunded by the government, who will be in charge of the process. It will also make sure it is reimbursed by the U.S. industry. Clearly, the loan guarantee mechanism becomes obsolete in that case.

The same is true for the famous stand still clause. Some 12 months are guaranteed and that is what the industry asked for.

My colleague will recall what Guy Chevrette said on behalf of the Quebec Forest Industry Council, that he was one of us once, that he had been involved in politics and that we could get into as much politics as we wanted as long as the agreement was approved.

That is what the government asks.

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, September 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, first of all I would like my colleague to know that the position I am presenting today is not the result of mulling things over in an office but is based on what I discovered out in the field.

As members know, I am from the riding of Mégantic—L'Érable, home to several sawmills. I know what I am talking about because I gathered the information from those in the industry. An overwhelming majority are in favour of this agreement. We have been told to sign the agreement and get on with it because they are all virtually dying out there.

You can say what you want, that it is not this nor that, as members of the opposition and of other parties do. However, we have arrived at a practical solution that the industry can live with. And that is what it asked us to do.

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, September 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, like my colleague, the member for Cariboo—Prince George, I am pleased that we can share our time.

I am happy, here today, to be able to speak on behalf of my riding as the member for Mégantic—L'Érable, and as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources.

Last Tuesday, September 12, the Minister of International Trade signed, along with his American counterpart, U.S. Trade Representative, Susan Schwab, the long-awaited softwood lumber agreement.

This signing represented a major turning point for both our countries. Settlement of this complex, longstanding dispute until now seemed like an unachievable objective. In spite of all the efforts, previous governments never managed to settle it. The Canadian softwood lumber industry was thus faced with an extremely unstable trade environment resulting in lengthy and costly legal proceedings against the United States.

Thanks to the new spirit of cooperation between our two countries, the Canadian government has been able to accomplish what no other government had managed to do, that is, conclude an agreement that ends this dispute, on conditions that are very favourable to Canada and that respond directly to the concerns raised by the industry and the provinces.

This concrete and flexible agreement ensures foreseeable access to the American market, provides for the refund of over $5 billion Canadian—or $4.4 billion U.S.—of duties held on deposit and ends years of costly litigation. Furthermore, it enables the softwood lumber producers to break the vicious circle of legal proceedings and provides them with the stable trading environment they need to make their companies grow and to invest in them.

This agreement is in the best interest of the Quebec forest industry, which employs 107,000 workers and accounts for 18% of Canadian softwood lumber exports to the United States. For example, the agreement exempts from the export measures sawmills located near the Quebec border—and I am proud to have many of them in my riding of Mégantic—L'Érable—a key position supported by the government and industry in this province. For companies that are not exempted, Quebec can choose the border option that best suits its economic and trading situation.

The province and the industry in Quebec were greatly concerned about their inability to respond to the needs of their American customers because of the rigidity of the regulations related to export quotas. As a result, the government negotiated provisions allowing companies to carry forward or carry back up to 12% of their quota export volume from the previous or next month.

The agreement has the strong support of the three main producer provinces, including Quebec, the Quebec Forest Industry Council, the president of the Fédération des travailleurs du Québec, Mr. Henri Massé, as well as the vast majority of Canadian softwood lumber producers.

The ball is now in the court of Canadian parliamentarians. It is our turn to review the bill and adopt it so that Canada can meet its commitments under the agreement.

In reaching a decision, honourable members should give special consideration to the situation that would prevail if the bill is not adopted, including the high costs that would result if the bill is not passed.

Indeed, one need not go far back in time to recognize what would happen in the absence of this agreement. Our softwood lumber producers have spent the better part of the past two decades in waging numerous unending legal battles against the United States. They have been able to see the great influence of American protectionists and they know too well the harmful consequences of this dispute, both on the human level and in financial terms.

I invite my fellow members to ask the people who live in the communities that depend on softwood lumber if they would prefer a continuation of the dispute, with all that implies in terms of effort and dollars, or the concrete and immediate settlement that this hard-won agreement provides.

After a careful examination of the facts, I am convinced that hon. members will come to the same conclusion as the provinces and the industry: that this agreement represents the best solution for the future of the Canadian softwood lumber industry, for the 300 communities and the 300,000 workers and their families who depend on softwood lumber.

This agreement is in the best interest of Quebec and of Canada.

[Atlas of Canada, June 16th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise in this House to acknowledge the success of the Earth Sciences Sector at Natural Resources Canada. Over the past 100 years, the Atlas of Canada has benefited Canada's identity, economy and environment.

I am pleased to announce today that the government will be unveiling a postal stamp celebrating 100 years since the publication of the first Atlas of Canada. We are looking forward to the positive contribution the Atlas of Canada will be making over the next 100 years.

[Natural Resources, June 16th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, one thing the Minister of Natural Resources is aware of is that the opposition is asking us to use the Liberal approach, which did not work and which led to a 35% increase in greenhouse gases. That would be irresponsible. We have a real plan that will work.

[Natural Resources, June 16th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, this is what the Department of Natural Resources is doing: it is providing Canadians with good management. A few months after coming to power, we are asked to move ahead blindly and launch a bunch of different programs. Canadians gave us a mandate to establish responsible government. That is what we will do. We are open to suggestions, but we will manage things responsibly.

[The Environment, June 9th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. All Canadians can agree that there has been an increase in greenhouse gas emissions due to the previous government's failure to take action.

We are a responsible government. We are reviewing programs precisely in order to keep our promises to Canadians and so as not to betray them, as they were betrayed for the past 13 years.

This is what it means to be a responsible government.