Gerald Keddy

[International Trade, April 17th, 2013]

Because we speak through you, Mr. Speaker.

[International Trade, April 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, you have to ask yourself a question. Why would the NDP--

[International Trade, April 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I may not have heard all of the question. The member started out on the CETA with the European Union and then started talking about a free trade agreement with India. I am not quite certain which answer she would like. We will negotiate both agreements in the best interests of Canadians.

[Privilege, March 28th, 2013]

This guy should not have started it—

[National Defence, March 18th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I know the hon. member has not looked, but the entire world is in deficit and Canada is doing better in every category than all of our competition. We are leading the world and we are going to continue to do that through growth, opportunity and exports. Sixty-five per cent of our income is generated through exports. It is probably higher than that in the member's own riding.

Another good portion of our income for our provincial colleagues and our provincial economies is services. We are looking at opening up services in the CETA with the European Union. There is opportunity here, but I am going to throw it back at the hon. member one more time. He is going to have to base his criticisms on facts, not on innuendo or rumour, and he is going to have to present them in this place in a logical manner.

I urge the member to support the agreement because it is good for the country and for his constituents.

[National Defence, March 18th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I find it more than a bit surprising that the hon. member wants answers to direct questions, but he wants to ask those questions that are full of fallacy and innuendo, maybe and might and could be.

Here is the reality for the member. We are negotiating a comprehensive economic trade agreement with the European Union. We have negotiated trade agreements already with nine countries around the world. This one will be by far the largest, with 27 member states of the European Union, and 28 member states after Croatia joins on July 1. The hon. member knows that he will have to take a stand and that is really the issue about which he is concerned. He will have to balance this agreement in a reasonable, rational way. He wants to find a reason not to support it, but he will have to make a decision and he will have to present that decision based on some type of real logic to the Canadian public, because there will be real numbers in front of him at the time.

We make no apologies for negotiating this trade agreement on behalf of Canadians and we make no apologies for negotiating this trade agreement directly with the European Union. When it is negotiated, it will come back to the House for open, lengthy and fulsome debate, as it should without question.

In the meantime, the hon. member has to take a look at his own riding in Malpeque in Prince Edward Island. He has to ask himself these questions. Why not give his constituents greater access for potatoes in the European marketplace? Why not give his constituents greater access to the European marketplace for fish and seafood? P.E.I. produces some of the best seafood in the world. It is a great producer of Atlantic blue mussels.

I was at the Boston Seafood Show, the third-largest seafood show in the world, talking to our producers, many of them from the member's riding, about the advantages to reducing an average 12% tariff on seafood going into the European market with tariffs as high as 25%. If we can reduce that to zero, that is a tremendous boost for the member's constituents. The problem is that the member will have to make a decision. He will have to balance the facts, not the rumours or innuendo, of a completed agreement and he will have to make a decision.

I hope he makes that decision on behalf of his constituents, for the sake of the country and not for the sake of political gain. We have far too much of that in this place, and it is time the opposition members look beyond what they see as a quick, easy political gain to what is in the best interest of the nation.

[International Trade, March 18th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, that is just patent fearmongering. Those questions have already been answered. The hon. member knows that.

The member is protected in this place because he can say anything he wants. It is like Christmas every day for the NDP, because its members are not held responsible. They are in the House of Commons. They do not have to stick to the written law or rule. They can just simply spin anything they want. It is absolute patent nonsense.

What this is about is a job-creating, pro-trade plan for the benefit of all Canadians, a minimum of a 20% increase in trade between the European Union and Canada. Jobs, growth and opportunity for all Canadians are in this trade agreement.

[International Trade, March 18th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we have pretty well heard most of what the hon. member has to contribute. He summed it up himself just now: fear, ideology and spin. That pretty well sums what he really had to say.

The member wants to look, in a serious way, at leaked documents. What is a leaked document? Who even knows? The member says this deal should be over. Is that based on a calendar? Should this be done by the calendar or on the quality of the agreement?

The minister has briefed the committee. He has been to the committee. We have had trade officials at the committee. We have had Steve Verheul, who is our chief trade negotiator, at the committee. It is absolute nonsense that somehow the European Parliament is better briefed than our own parliamentarians. It is a false statement, clearly.

We have been to the European Parliament, and we listened to this nonsense before we went. When we got there, we found out that the European parliamentarians on that trade committee were not nearly as well briefed as we were on the facts of the agreement.

The reality is that this agreement is being negotiated. People do not do negotiations in public or in the press, unless they are the NDP or trade unionists, using it to leverage some type of gain. In this case, I would call that some type of supposed political gain.

For the member's own province, for the first time, we are looking to get Canadian fish and seafood into the European Union duty free. That is a huge boost for British Columbia, with a great potential for the wild fish industry in British Columbia.

In the last three years British Columbia shipped somewhere in the neighbourhood of $324 million worth of lumber into the European Union. If we could lower those tariffs, if we could move that lumber into the European Union duty free, that would be a tremendous boost for the province of British Columbia.

In closing, I would emphasize that this is not going to be negotiated on the calendar and it is certainly not going to be negotiated by the opposition. When this deal is final, it will be debated in this place where it should be debated. It will be before the committee and we will study it in depth, as our responsibilities require us to do.

[Community Theatre, March 18th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, community theatre enriches the lives of both those who take an active part in it and those in the community who benefit from attending the live theatre productions. In South Shore—St. Margaret's, we have been enjoying the wonderful performances of the South Shore Players for 20 years.

The South Shore Players offers its members the opportunity to showcase their talents and creativity and is helping to build the social and cultural foundations of our communities. This year's playbill is the culmination of many months of hard work by directors John Letson and Liesje Wagner Letson as well as the cast and crew.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the many dedicated volunteers, both past and present, who make these performances possible. I congratulate all those involved with the South Shore Players on their 20th anniversary and on seeing their efforts reach this incredible milestone.

[Foreign Investment, March 7th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I know I only have a minute to sum up, so I am going to try to stick to a couple of important issues and simply correct the record.

Again, in no way, shape or form does this treaty impede Canada's ability to regulate and legislate in areas such as the environment, culture, safety, health and conservation. The hon. member is incorrect. She is fearmongering and following in the footsteps of the NDP. It is unfortunate to hear that type of rhetoric in the House, quite frankly.

This is no different from 24 other foreign investment promotion and protection agreements that we have already signed with other countries around the world. It is similar to the agreements that apparently dangerous countries, according to the hon. member, such as New Zealand, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and Japan have already signed with China. There is nothing untoward here. This again is broken down to rules-based trading. Everybody knows the rules. That is fair trading.