Deepak Obhrai

[Settlement of International Investment Disputes Act, May 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Bloc for supporting this important legislation.

To date, this convention has been ratified by 143 countries making it one of the most ratified instruments in the world. If there were anything wrong with this instrument, we would not have so many countries signing this convention.

By signing this convention we would not only be providing protection to our investors but we would be providing them with a mechanism to solve any disputes that arise. I am happy to tell the member that over a period of time, over 40 years, not many disputes have occurred where the ICSID Convention has been used. Nevertheless, we need to ratify this to give our businesses the same kind of level playing field that other businesses have in 143 countries around the world.

[Settlement of International Investment Disputes Act, May 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for Lévis—Bellechasse.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to further explain Bill C-53, which implements Canada's obligation under the Implementation of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes.

Canada signed the ICSID convention on December 15, 2006. That signature was a public undertaking that Canada intended to pass legislation so we could ratify the convention. This bill is the fulfillment of that undertaking. I will say more later in my speech about the ratification of the convention.

The ICSID is an important convention for protecting investment around the world. ICSID awards can already be enforced in 143 countries. It is time to provide the benefit of ICSID to Canadian investors. However, to gain that protection for Canadian investors, Canada needs legislation to ensure that ICSID awards, wherever they are made, can be enforced in Canada.

Canada also needs to provide the privileges and immunities needed for ICSID to function in Canada. We need to ensure that persons using conciliation under the convention cannot abuse that process. Canada needs to ensure that it can appoint qualified persons to ICSID panels.

Previous speeches have provided an overview of the bill and its provisions dealing with enforcement. I will focus in this speech on privileges and immunities, conciliation and appointments to the panel.

Let me begin with privileges and immunities. The privileges and immunities provided for in this bill do not deal with the privileges and immunities of the foreign governments against which an award is made. Those privileges and immunities will continue to be governed by the Foreign Missions and International Organizations Act.

Instead, clause 5 of the bill deals with the privileges and immunities of the ICSID and of individuals working for the centre or engaged in ICSID arbitration. Generally, clause 5 simply faithfully incorporates into Canadian law the privileges and immunities which the convention requires.

ICSID is provided with the legal capacity of a private person. This means it will be able contract, acquire property and institute legal proceedings. ICSID will be immune from legal process except when it waives this immunity.

Officers and employees of ICSID and people acting as conciliators or arbitrators will also be immune from legal process, but their immunity is limited. They will have immunity only for acts they have done in the exercise of their functions and only if the ICSID does not waive this immunity.

If they are not Canadians, these people are entitled to the same immunities and immigration restrictions, registration requirements and national service obligations as Canada extends to representatives, officials and employees of comparable rank of other states. The same rules apply to foreign exchange and travel restrictions.

These rules would also apply to people appearing in ICSID proceedings as parties, agents, counsel, advocates, witnesses or experts. However, this immunity is generally limited to the period when they are travelling to and from the place where the proceedings are held and for the period of their stay there.

There is nothing new or unusual in the privileges and immunities which the convention and the bill provide to individuals. Immunity from legal process is limited to functional immunity. As to other privileges and immunities, Canada only needs to provide them on the same basis as it provides to officials of other states.

All Canada's policies that apply to the extension of such privileges and immunities to officials of foreign states will also apply to the privileges and immunities provided to people under this bill.

I should also note that ICSID does not have to pay taxes or customs duties. Canadian may also not levy taxes on the salary or benefits of ICSID staff members who are not Canadians. Similarly, Canada will not tax ICSID conciliators or arbitrators who do their work in Canada if the only basis for such tax is that the work was done in Canada.

These tax privileges, like other privileges and immunities, are exclusively related to ICSID and its activities. They do not limit Canada's ability to tax Canadians. Indeed, if ICSID arbitrations and conciliations are not conducted in Canada, these tax privileges have almost no revenue impact.

I turn next to clause 10, the portion of the bill that deals with conciliation.

In addition to arbitration, ICSID also provides a conciliation process for investor state disputes. Conciliation is a process in which the parties to the dispute use a third party to clarify issues and to try to bring about agreement between them on mutually accepted terms. If the disputing parties reach agreement, the third party prepares a report explaining the issues and the agreement reached by the parties.

Conciliation can only work if both the investor and the state can speak honestly and openly to the conciliator, but conciliation can break down. For conciliation to work, the parties and the conciliator have to be able to say things that might be damaging admissions in any subsequent court action or arbitration.

The convention deals with this problem by requiring parties to the convention to ensure that what is said or written in an ICSID conciliation process will not be used in any subsequent proceeding. Clause 10 implements this obligation.

I now turn to clause 11, which provides for the governor in council to designate persons to the ICSID panel of conciliators and the ICSID panel of arbitrators.

Articles 12 to 16 of the convention set up two panels, one for conciliators, one for arbitrators. Each state party to ICSID may designate four persons to each panel and the ICSID secretary general may also appoint ten. Panel members serve for renewable terms of six years, but continue in office until their successors are designated. People designated to panels must have recognized competency in the fields of law, commerce, industry or finance.

Articles 31 and 40 of the convention provide that if the secretary general of ICSID is required to appoint the chairman of a conciliation commission or an arbitral tribunal, he must select the chairman from the relevant panel. However, the parties to the dispute are free to appoint conciliators or arbitrators from outside the panel and may well agree on a chairman.

Being named to the panel provides no remuneration. Historically, the chances of a panellist actually being asked to arbitrate or conciliate a case are quite small. This is because there have only been 118 cases decided by the ICSID arbitral tribunals and 5 conciliation reports issued over the last 40 years. Therefore, only 118 arbitrators have been appointed to chair arbitral panels and only 5 conciliators have been selected to chair conciliation commissions. Remember as well that the parties can appoint a chairman from outside the panel.

Once this bill is declared in force in Canada, Canada will be in a position to ratify the ICSID convention. The convention also permits us to designate provinces and territories as entities that could use ICSID arbitration.

Some provinces with an interest in the convention still have concerns about the implementation and operation of the convention. We are working with the provinces and territories to resolve such concerns.

Canada can designate a province or a territory under the convention at the same time as the ratification or at any time later.

I urge the House to consider this bill on an expeditious basis. One hundred and forty-three countries are already party to the ICSID convention. Canadians with investments abroad are asking us to make the ICSID option available to them. It is time to act.

[May 14th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, again, I assure the member that we are doing everything possible to ensure that service is given to all Canadians, not just those living in urban centres.

Based on the demand volume in her riding of Rimouski, 2,271 passport applications in 2006, and the required infrastructure to support the operations of a fully functional office there, Passport Canada would be operating this a significant financial loss. That is why we have a receiving agent in her riding. It takes approximately 20 days to receive a passport from a receiving agent.

As I stated in my speech, we are working very hard to ensure the backlog is completed by the end of the summer.

[May 14th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to discuss passport services with the member for Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques this evening.

Due to U.S. requirements for air travel to the United States, Passport Canada continues to experience a sharp volume increase in passport applications in all of its offices and its mailing service. To deal with this, 500 new Passport Canada employees have been hired, and most of them are already at work. Only about 14 require further training.

These measures mean that we are now processing 20,000 passports a day. This is an increase in capacity of 40% from last fall. If the current demand continues, we expect to clear the backlog by the end of the summer.

Historically, passport offices have been located in large urban centres to maximize the accessibility rate in Canada. Today, over 65% of the Canadian population resides within 10 kilometres of a passport point of service. Over 98% of the Canadian population resides within 100 kilometres of a passport point of service.

This being put forth, the government recognizes that Canadians need access to passport services wherever they reside, especially given the current context of an east-west migration pattern.

To achieve this, Passport Canada is continuously looking at ways to improve security and client services while prudently managing its funds in order to ensure an accessible, reliable, flexible and efficient service at a reasonable cost.

For that reason, a key element of Passport Canada's service strategy is to offer efficient and economic alternatives such as receiving agents where it is not financially sustainable to open new offices. The receiving agent program, developed in partnership with Canada Post and Service Canada, helps broaden access for Canadians to passport services in urban, rural and northern areas. A Canada Post receiving agent is available in Rimouski at 136 St-Germain Street West.

Passport Canada is also looking at expanding its partnership agreements and investing in new technologies so Service Canada and Canada Post may broaden their passport services across the country. It is noteworthy that Passport Canada is doing all this during a period of unprecedented growth.

I assure the member that the objective is to improve security while maintaining the level of client service through multiple business channels. Passport Canada continues to be committed to ensuring consistency in service to Canadians and consistency in the application of policies regardless of where they live.

My government welcomes a dialogue with MPs on this matter.

[May 14th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the hon. member that we need to use the institutions we have available. He rightly pointed out that the Commonwealth is one of those institutions.

I want to tell the hon. member that at the end of the day, the president of Zimbabwe has openly said he will not listen to anything that comes from western countries. He will not go back to the old colonial style of white people telling him what to do. Of course his assumption is absolutely wrong. We are not interested in that kind of thing, but he has said that. That is why the best approach is to use the African Union, his own peers, to tell him that what he is doing is wrong.

Insofar as the representative of Zimbabwe in Canada, it is better for us to have the representative remain here and we can tell the representative what the Canadian people want to happen and she can tell her government what the Canadian public is saying. I am sure she will be listening to tonight's debate. I hope she will pass these comments on to her government and indicate how the people of Canada feel in reference to Zimbabwe.

[May 14th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for raising the very important issue of what is happening in Africa. He very rightly pointed out the countries where we have a very serious and grave concern about what is going on.

As a matter of fact, talking about Zimbabwe, on many occasions the Minister of Foreign Affairs and I have condemned what is going on in Zimbabwe. We have met with the opposition leaders who have come here and we have used our diplomatic channels to put pressure on the government of Zimbabwe to respect human rights.

However, we know that is not happening. The best course of action is to pressure the African Union to bring some kind of resolution to the issue in Zimbabwe. There is no question that what the hon. member has said is happening in Zimbabwe is happening in Zimbabwe. It needs to be addressed.

We have put pressure on South Africa. I understand it is using what is called quiet diplomacy. At the end of the day, Africa is a continent and we need to get the leaders in Africa to put pressure on Zimbabwe. I am very happy to tell the hon. member that the president of Zambia has finally said that what is happening in Zimbabwe is not acceptable and now is putting on pressure.

I agree with the member. Our diplomats will work in the international arena to ensure that our point of view is made very clear to Zimbabwe. We will ask the African Union to help us bring a peaceful resolution to the crisis in Zimbabwe.

In reference to the point the member raised about Sudan, I want to tell the hon. member that the previous Liberal government had made a commitment to Sudan and we are continuing with that. We are spending $8 million a month in Sudan to ensure that the African Union and the UN forces get the necessary tools to bring the warring parties to peace. As the member rightly pointed out, many people say that genocide is happening in Darfur.

As a matter of fact two weeks ago I was in Egypt and I had a lengthy talk with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon about his impressions of what is happening in Sudan. He thought there was some hope and that there would be some movement in getting a UN hybrid force in Darfur. We are working through the security council. I had an opportunity to talk to the Chinese foreign minister to see if his government would put pressure on the government of Sudan. I am happy to report to the member that the Chinese have appointed a special envoy for Darfur.

Yes, these are areas on which I share concern with the member. Canada is working in those areas. Canada is at the forefront. Canadians are doing diplomacy behind the scenes, but we are getting our point across.

[Foreign Affairs, May 11th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the embassy in Saudi Arabia has contacted the Saudi Arabian authorities to address that issue. I would like to remind her that it was not the Government of Saudi Arabia that was responsible for it, but the organizers there. We have filed a protest and we are talking to the Saudi Arabian government about it.

[Passport Canada, May 11th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to assure the hon. member that those 500 officers are now fully working. That is why we have been able to increase our capacity by 40% by addressing 20,000 passports per day. As I stated, we expect this backlog to be over by the end of the summer.

[Passport Canada, May 11th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, through several measures, Passport Canada is now able to output 20,000 passports per day, an increase of 40% over last fall's capacity. However, Canadians continue to apply for passports at an unprecedented rate, at about 18,000 applications per day.

Passport Canada is now able to cope with the demand and address its backlog. The situation is improving and, if the current demand continues, most of the service channels will be normal by the end of the summer.

[Foreign Affairs, May 11th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, Canada and the U.S.A. have a mutual legal assistance treaty with Mexico which provides for the assistance of one country to another in obtaining evidence for the investigation of crimes when requested.

However, assistance must be requested. Canada, like the U.S., can respond to a request for assistance from Mexico in a criminal investigation under that treaty but both the U.S. and Canada require a request.

We are prepared to work with the Mexicans on this and on any other file involving Canadians and we have told them so.