David Lametti

[International Trade, December 1st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the government recognizes that it is essential to consult Canadians on the trans-Pacific partnership, the TPP. We promised Canadians that we would consult them in an open and transparent manner on the results of this agreement. We are now honouring this campaign promise by holding hundreds of meetings and discussions all across Canada.

I want to congratulate Jada Malott and other young people who have taken the time to share their opinion of the TPP. I met with her myself that day after question period and I asked her for her opinion on the TPP.

We want to hear from everyone. For instance, on September 9, Minister Freeland and Minister Bennett initiated a dialogue with some indigenous groups on international trade and investment initiatives, including the TPP.

This recent dialogue with the aboriginal peoples of Canada highlights the government's continued commitment to including all Canadians in its consultations. This dialogue is still ongoing and includes a recent trip I took to Yellowknife. I travelled there to consult stakeholders in the Northwest Territories and hear from representatives from indigenous groups, businesses, and civil society organizations.

Other than the 250-plus events involving over 500 stakeholders from across the country, we also held 10 town hall meetings that drew more than 1,000 members of the public. Many other interested Canadians shared their thoughts directly with us, including through submissions to the government website on the TPP consultations.

A wide range of Canadians have participated in these consultations, including representatives from the provinces, businesswomen, innovation company reps, farmers, representatives from the forestry and wood product sectors, representatives from the seafood products sector, indigenous groups, environmental groups, small and medium-sized businesses, unions, auto workers, auto parts manufacturers, port authorities, civil society organizations, academics, students, business leaders, and citizens.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on International Trade is also studying the TPP and its representatives have travelled the country as part of its strategy to raise awareness among Canadians. The House committee is accepting submissions until the end of January 2017 from all interested parties and those who want to share their views are invited to take part.

The government records every position and point of view, and it is quite clear that industrial associations and export-oriented businesses in Canada support the TPP. They generally perceive it as an important opportunity to diversify Canada's trade and increase market access for Canadian exports.

However, it is also clear that concerns are being raised by other representatives, such as those from civil society and unions, about specific aspects of the agreement, including the impact of the TPP on the economy and jobs in Canada; the potential financial impact of certain requirements regarding pharmaceuticals; and the scope and enforcement of the investor-state dispute settlement mechanism, or ISDS.

[International Trade, December 1st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that the European Union has a number of different bilateral and multilateral trade agreements, and ISDS provisions are a standard feature in all of them.

International investment is a key driver of economic growth. It creates more trade and more jobs. The government negotiated a progressive agreement that enhances economic opportunities while ensuring our ability to regulate in the public interest. CETA will deliver benefits for consumers through lower prices and more choice, for workers through more jobs and better jobs, and for businesses through reduced costs. Our government is committed to ensuring that these important benefits for Canadians are realized as soon as possible.

This is a landmark initiative, ensuring our country's continued prosperity.

[International Trade, December 1st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for bringing her unique voice to the House. CETA is clearly in Canada's national interest and we feel it is time for all of us to rally around it. On top of delivering tangible growth for our economy and opportunities for the middle class, CETA will provide a strong foundation for Canada and the EU to demonstrate leadership on what is truly a progressive accord, a green accord, a health accord, and a labour accord.

It also enshrines the right to regulate. The ICS provisions are something that the trade committee has looked at over the last few sessions. We will continue to work with the committee, and with our European partners as well.

International investment flows are a key driver of economic growth. European investments in Canada create jobs for Canadians and vice versa. These investments also create new trade opportunities where none have existed before. A comprehensive agreement such as CETA cannot ignore this crucial aspect of the economic relationship between Canada and Europe.

CETA establishes a framework for Canada and the EU to build on our already substantial investment ties. CETA's investment chapter is designed to give investors greater security, stability, certainty, and protection for their investments, and to secure access to each other's respective markets.

There is no opt-out provision held by any party for any element of CETA, but CETA has been deemed a mixed agreement and, therefore, requires ratification, as a whole, by each individual EU member state for things falling within their jurisdiction. Only after all parties have ratified CETA will the ICS mechanism for the resolution of investment disputes become operational.

While we know that ratification by all 28 EU member states may require some time, we are confident that this will happen. Once ratified by Canada, the EU and all of its member states, CETA will provide Canadian and European investors with a predictable framework based on principles of non-discrimination, fairness, and transparency.

Under CETA, we created a permanent tribunal that is responsible for resolving investment disputes. It is made up of 15 members who are appointed by the European Union and Canada for fixed terms. The creation of this tribunal will make it possible to move away from the existing mechanism, which involves special arbitration tribunals. Hearings and any related documents will be completely accessible to the public. These improvements seek to assure citizens that the decisions rendered by the dispute settlement mechanism are fair and objective.

Nothing in CETA prevents governments from regulating in the public interest to protect or promote public health, social services, public education, or the environment. This principle, which is well recognized in international law, is clearly set out in the CETA text.

These improvements to CETA show our commitment to ensuring that this is a progressive agreement. All Canadians can consult the full, final version of the agreement, which has been available since July 2016, in order to better understand that this is a tremendous achievement in progressive trade policy.

To answer specifically the member's question relating to the circumstances around the ISDS provisions and application, I would like to quote CETA chief negotiator, Steve Verheul, during his testimony to the House of Commons Standing Committee on International Trade, when he stated, “Given the investment dispute resolution process will not be in place until all member states approve, we will not be able to use that mechanism, and neither will the EU.”

Therefore, in the case of the Polish mine scenario, we need not worry.

[Montreal Impact, November 29th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, Wednesday evening will mark a red-letter day in Canadian soccer history.

The Montreal Impact, led by Didier Drogba, Ignacio Piatti, and Laurent Ciman, will take on Toronto FC in the MLS championship semifinal.

If anyone had told me 40 years ago, as an Italian Canadian kid playing local soccer, that 60,000 people would have attended the first match in Olympic Stadium, I would have said, “Impossible”. Yet that is precisely what happened last week when the Impact won 3-2. More than 30,000 people are expected for the match at BMO Field in Toronto tomorrow evening.

Soccer is the sport of the future for Canada. It is a unifying force in Canada's diverse cultural landscape, and the Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver clubs are on a mission to train the next generation of players.

I congratulate Toronto FC, the Montreal Impact, and the Saputo family. Go Impact.

[Softwood Lumber, November 28th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, the government will continue to work hard to make progress on the softwood lumber file. Canada prefers a negotiated agreement, but it will not hesitate to vigorously defend the interests of Canada's softwood lumber industry before the courts. The Government of Canada recognizes the importance of the softwood lumber industry, considers it a priority, and gives priority to this file.

We will negotiate a good agreement for Canada and not just any agreement. We will continue to work with the country's stakeholders to move forward in the softwood lumber file.

[Softwood Lumber, November 28th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her question.

Our government is guilty of neither negligence nor inaction. The softwood lumber industry is very important to Canada. It is a key component of Canada's forestry sector and the Canadian economy because it generates some 260,000 jobs.

The industry is also an economic driver for many rural communities. The United States is Canada's main export market for softwood lumber, so it is clear that maintaining stable, predictable access to the American market is critical to the industry's ongoing success.

The government recognizes that, which is why it has made the softwood lumber file a priority since coming to power. The minister, Ambassador MacNaughton, and I have done a lot of work on this file, and we will continue to do so. We have taken part in an exhaustive consultation process with Canadian stakeholders, a process that is still ongoing, to ensure that Canada's negotiating position reflects the whole range of Canadian interests. Consultations revealed a clear preference for a negotiated agreement, and the Liberal government acted accordingly by opening talks with the United States earlier this year.

In a joint statement with President Obama on June 29, 2016, the Prime Minister described the main features of a new agreement. In addition, in order to reach a mutually acceptable agreement with the United States, the minister regularly discussed the softwood lumber issue with her American counterpart, Ambassador Michael Froman, including at the APEC summit in Lima just recently.

Officials from Global Affairs Canada have also been working tirelessly on this file as they continue intensive negotiations with their American counterparts. Since October 2015, there have been 18 negotiating sessions in addition to regular informal discussions, all with the goal of reaching a new softwood lumber agreement.

Canada finds it unfortunate that the U.S. forest industry has asked the Department of Commerce and the ITC to investigate the countervailing and anti-dumping duties regarding Canadian softwood lumber imports. These claims are unfounded. The Government of Canada would prefer to come up with a negotiated solution. However, Canada will relentlessly defend the interests of the Canadian softwood lumber industry, including in the case of disputes, whether before the WTO, under NAFTA, or before the American courts.

The Liberal government will continue to work with the provinces and territories, the industry, workers, and other stakeholders to defend Canada's interests. We want to get a good deal for our softwood lumber industry, not just any deal.

[Petitions, November 25th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I present on behalf of a number of my constituents a petition on electoral reform.

[Ethics, November 25th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, our government held consultations throughout Quebec on various subjects and various files, including softwood lumber.

I travelled to Amqui two weeks ago. I went to the Saguenay as did the minister. She consulted Quebec industry representatives. The Minister of Agriculture and his parliamentary secretary took similar action with respect to diafiltered milk.

Therefore, it is definitely not true that we are not consulting Quebeckers. That is one of our responsibilities as government.

[Softwood Lumber, November 25th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question and his interest in this industry in Quebec.

From the beginning we have worked with Quebec's industry and its workers to understand their positions and to promote those positions. We are taking into account the distinctions between the industries in Quebec and those in the rest of the country. This is part of our negotiation strategy and we will continue to promote Quebec's interests before the tribunals during the negotiations until we have an agreement.

[Softwood Lumber, November 25th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, we have been standing up for Canadians from coast to coast to coast on this file since the get-go, which is more than we can say about the previous government.

Our strategy remains the right strategy. We are continuing to negotiate on behalf of Canadians. We are continuing to stay in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We are going to defend ourselves in front of trade tribunals, which the previous Liberal governments under prime ministers Chrétien and Martin did. We have never lost. We will continue to move forward in that direction.