Deepak Obhrai

[Foreign Affairs, December 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, under the provisions of Standing Order 32(2), I have the pleasure to table, in both official languages, seven treaties, entitled: “Convention concerning Forced or Compulsory Labour”, adopted at Geneva, on June 28, 1930, as modified by the Final Articles Revision Convention, 1946; “Convention concerning Tripartite Consultations to Promote the Implementation of International Labour Standards”, adopted at Geneva on June 21, 1976; “Convention concerning the Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health”, adopted at Geneva on June 15, 2006; “Amendments to the Text and to Annexes I, II, III, IV, VI and VIII of the Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution on Persistent Organic Pollutants”, adopted at Geneva on December 18, 2009; “Amendments to Annexes V and VII of the Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution on Persistent Organic Pollutants”, adopted at Geneva on December 18, 2009; “Amendment to Appendices I and II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora”, adopted at Doha from March 13 to 25, 2010; and “Amendments to Appendix III of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora”, notified on May 25, 2010 and July 16, 2010. Explanatory memoranda are included with the treaties.

[Human Rights, December 10th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, today we celebrate International Human Rights Day.

Human rights are at the very heart of this government's policies whether it is at home or abroad. Our policies have always been based on the principles and values of a free and democratic society. However, Canadians must be mindful that the rights we enjoy are not shared by all around the world.

On this occasion, I would like to take this opportunity to honour those who have stood up and defended human rights. In particular, I congratulate Mr. Liu Xiaobo on winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

We also commend individuals like Nguyen Van Dai, Gao Zhisheng, Joseph Zen Ze-kiun, Ko Mya Aye and countless others around the world who have raised awareness about the struggle for the promotion of human rights.

Our government will continue to promote freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law around the world.

[Elections in Côte d'Ivoire, December 3rd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, our government strongly condemns the violence which occurred during the elections in Côte d'Ivoire. On behalf of the Government of Canada, we call on both parties to respect the decision of the people of Côte d'Ivoire. Canada remains committed to ensuring a transparent electoral process.

Yesterday the Independent Electoral Commission announced that Alassane Ouattara had won the presidential election. Since then, the military has sealed all air, land and sea borders into Côte d'Ivoire and blocked international media broadcasts. These are very troubling developments.

Any dispute with the announced result must be dealt with in a legal and peaceful manner. Our government repeats its call for all stakeholders to remain calm and respect the democratic will of the citizens of Côte d'Ivoire.

[Nathalie Morin, November 30th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, this is a very complex family dispute with no easy solution.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs, myself and other members of cabinet have been engaged on this file with our counterparts in Saudi Arabia, including the Saudi Human Rights Commission. We will continue to do that.

[November 29th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the Investment Canada Act is in place so major investments are properly reviewed to ensure they are in the best interests of this country and, when they are not, this government will not hesitate to block them.

BHP Billiton was just one case. The policy of our government has always been clear. We welcome international investment for all the benefits it brings, including new ideas, sources of capital and job creation.

[November 29th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by stating that foreign investment plays an important part in the Canadian economy. Foreign investors bring capital, knowledge, capabilities, technology and other resources which can increase the productivity, efficiency and competitiveness of Canadian firms. Their investments help businesses to expand and create jobs for Canadians.

Indeed, Canada has one of the most open investment regimes in the world. In order to ensure that Canadian firms have access to investment opportunities abroad, it is important for Canada to maintain an investment climate which encourages the free flow of investment.

Canada has a broad framework in place to promote trade and investment while protecting its interests. This includes the Investment Canada Act, which provides the Minister of Industry with the power to review significant foreign investment proposals. The review threshold for WTO members is currently $299 million in book value of the assets of the Canadian business.

Where a proposed investment is subject to review under the act, the investor cannot implement the investment without the approval of the minister responsible for the act.

The Minister of Industry approves an application only when he is satisfied that the transaction is likely to be of net benefit to Canada. In making this determination, the minister must consider the factors listed in section 20 of the act. These include: the effect of the investment on the level and nature of economic activity in Canada; the degree and significance of participation by Canadians in the Canadian business or new Canadian business; the effect of the investment on productivity, industrial efficiency, technological development, product innovation and product variety in Canada; the effect of the investment on competition within any industry or industries in Canada; the compatibility of the investment with national industrial, economic and cultural policies; and the contribution of the investment to Canada's ability to compete in world markets.

As part of the review process, the Investment Review Division of Industry Canada consults with federal government departments with policy responsibility for the industrial sector involved, with the Competition Bureau. and with all the provinces in which the Canadian business has substantial activities or assets.

The Investment Canada Act is in place so that major investments are properly reviewed to ensure they are in the best interest of this country and, when they are not in the best interest of this country, this government will not hesitate to block a transaction.

BHP Billiton has withdrawn its application for review and informed its shareholders of this decision. Under the Investment Canada Act, this terminates the review process because there is no longer a transaction to review.

[Business of Supply, November 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I do agree with the member that it is a sad, sad, sad day for Canada when members of that party get up and consistently oppose everything.

Let us not forget it was that party that opposed the 2008 parliamentary resolution that was passed in this House. Every time there is something, members of that party will vote against it and say no. Then they pick up these things and ask how we can do development when there is no security. Only he knows.

Let me also say that the member shows up once in a while at the Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan. He does not talk to the other members who know exactly how the mission is being run, how the mission is going, not that member. The member will stand here and say that members of his party want a civilian mission and all these other things.

Did the member not listen to our speeches? We are saying that with the extension we will be doing exactly what he is talking about: diplomacy, development, everything. Also, there is the important element of building the state and security services. Yet the member's party will not recognize that.

That is why it is a sad day for Canada. That party is totally out of touch with what Canadians want.

[Business of Supply, November 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, as I listen to this debate, more and more of it is now being focused on development assistance. The hon. member has rightly pointed out that Afghanistan needs a lot of assistance in public service and, as my Liberal colleague said, health care, et cetera.

We need to understand, as I said in my speech, what Afghanistan was 10 years ago and what Afghanistan is today. The Taliban had destroyed everything and now, slowly but surely, with the help of the international community, all of these efforts are now coming together to create a viable state.

A viable state takes time, money and effort, but one cannot forget the fact that security is the key element. If we close our eyes to security, the Taliban will come back and, if the Taliban comes back, everything we have built and every soldier that Canada and the national community have lost will have been for nothing and we will be back to square one.

I do not understand why the Bloc would not see the development of security forces as another aspect of creating a viable state. It is important to do that. The Bloc members are very good at saying that we should build something this year, but they forget who will provide the security. Building a security force is another element of creating a state.

[Business of Supply, November 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, all morning there has been a debate. The government has laid out very clearly and we have argued on many of the points that the Bloc has mentioned. But of course the Bloc members do not want to listen to that. Since this morning I have been listening. One theme is coming from the Bloc and the NDP members who oppose this motion. Number one, that there is no debate in the House and, number two, that there is going to be no vote in the House.

I do not understand. What do they think is happening right now? Right now, we are debating the mission. It does not matter if they use the opposition day to bring that forward. But we are debating that matter. The Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of National Defence, the Liberal critics and the Bloc's own critics have all laid down their positions. So, we are debating this matter. I do not know why they keep saying we are not debating the matter.

Second, they say they want to have a vote in the House, that it is democracy. There will be a vote in the house on this motion they put forward. Next week there will be a vote on this motion. Then they will listen and they will understand what the majority of parliamentarians have said. They are saying it is the majority that should be speaking. So, the majority will be speaking.

My question for the member is: Will he accept the results of the vote on this motion next week, which will be the majority speaking?

[Business of Supply, November 25th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, it is good to know that the Liberal Party is not supporting this motion and has quite clearly outlined why we should stay in Afghanistan. Perhaps the hon. member can say what the Bloc and the NDP are inferring, too, which is that we should be in Afghanistan but without the security. How is that possible, that we do not train the people of Afghanistan to take care of themselves? As the foreign affairs critic said, it is critically important that Afghans take over the destiny of their country. We all agree with that.

So why does it feel as though the other two parties are saying things like we should be leaving, but the security blanket should be left alone? If it is not done by us, then by whom, may I ask?