House of Commons photoLost her last election, in 2011, with 14% of the vote.
Business of Supply May 16th, 2007
Mr. Chair, it is 2007 and, looking at our government's track record, I think the member is getting ahead of herself. We have made tremendous commitments to sport, including encouraging our youth to become more active in sport.
Let us talk about the announcement we just had the other day where we have a national soccer--
Business of Supply May 16th, 2007
Mr. Chair, the hon. member needs to know that I am not the Minister of Health so I cannot answer specific questions on the diabetes file. I also cannot answer questions on infrastructure because that is the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities.
However, with respect to infrastructure I know we made an announcement in the recent budget where we have increased infrastructure dollars to $33 billion, which is historic for the Government of Canada, and we have opened up the opportunity for smaller municipalities to look for infrastructure dollars for recreation centres.
The government has spent $140 million a year on sport, participation in sports and excellence in sports. Not only that, we have contributed $5 million more on the relaunch of an old program that the previous Liberal government trashed and destroyed, ParticipACTION, which is better than it has ever been.
Settlement of International Investment Disputes Act May 15th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, so far in this debate I often have heard these questions. Why now? Why proceed with this after over 40 years? We had the opportunity then and did not, so why now? I want to attempt to answer some of those questions.
I think the hon. member and most members in the House recognize that foreign investment 40 years ago was not what it is today. It has increased substantially. I would also like to point out that in regard to the 143 countries that have signed on to ICSID, there have been 100 disputes, and the majority of those disputes have been just in the last five years. We are seeing a lot of uptake on ICSID and the opportunity that it provides for business and arbitration.
The hon. members in the House, particularly the member for Newton—North Delta, talked a little about business in their communities. I think it would be interesting for him to know that the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the business community very much want to see this go forward because it is a benefit for them.
Because foreign investment has increased substantially in the last 40 years, and of course the uptake on ICSID and the arbitration process would ensure and confirm it for the House, would he agree that this is something Canada should be going forward with at this stage?
Settlement of International Investment Disputes Act May 15th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, just to follow up on your request for relevance, if the hon. member could refer to foreign investment and Canadian investors abroad just the odd time throughout his speech, it might be helpful.
Settlement of International Investment Disputes Act May 15th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I have a couple of comments for the hon. member and perhaps she would want to comment on them.
With regard to the business community in Canada, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce has written to the government and expressed that the business community very much would like to see Bill C-53 proceed. It would like to see Canada join along with the other 143 countries to date that have ratified.
I think what is important for the hon. member to know is that this is one of the most ratified instruments in the world. Of course, the international community is starting to realize the benefits of ICSID.
Perhaps the member would like to comment on whether she has had any conversations with the local business communities across the country. The member was a former party leader and I know that she would have had some connections with the business community. It would be very helpful to know what they have said to her.
I also want to point out that we are negotiating a foreign investment and protection agreement with China right now. I have been advised that having ICSID in place is something that would help us to proceed with this FIPA and go forward with respect to working with China. Does she have any comments on that?
Settlement of International Investment Disputes Act May 15th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals and other members in the House rise to speak about Bill C-53, which is about protecting our Canadian businesses abroad, I would hope that they at least could use the words “business” or “foreign investment” at some point and at least keep some of the debate relevant to what we are talking about today, just a small attempt--
Settlement of International Investment Disputes Act May 15th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, as it is right now, five provinces have implemented legislation to proceed with this convention. All the provinces have been in ongoing negotiations with the federal government for many years.
I would note again that this has been on the table for over 40 years, since 1966, so it has been a couple of decades that the federal government has been working and negotiating with the provinces. The provinces actually want us to proceed with this federal legislation. It does not mean that a province must participate. In fact, if a province chooses not to, it does not need to put legislation in place.
However, five provinces do want to proceed and in order for them to do so, we must have federal legislation. I cannot see any province wanting to hold back another province.
Settlement of International Investment Disputes Act May 15th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, to be truthful, the question is irrelevant to the bill that we are discussing today.
I will say that Canada respects its international obligations. This bill does underscore that Canada is open for business but we have always respected our international obligations. When the Government of Canada has been at fault with a foreign investor, we have always lived up to our obligations so it will not change anything. What it will do is protect our businesses abroad.
I have a couple of very important supportive, positive quotes for Canada ratifying this convention, which I would like to read for the hon. member. The first one is by Michael Murphy, the executive vice-president for policy, from the Canadian Chamber of Commerce. He states, “For Canadian businesses investing abroad, ratifying the ICSID Convention is an effective way for the Government of Canada to provide these investors with a means of protecting their investment: an efficient avenue for seeking a remedy should their investment be compromised”.
He also said that “Canadian businesses investing abroad would finally be afforded the same level of protection as our competitors. In addition, ratification of the ICSID Convention would enable the Government of Canada to conclude its foreign investment and protection agreement for the negotiations with China much sooner, allowing the government to produce real benefits for Canadian businesses”--
Settlement of International Investment Disputes Act May 15th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I speak at second reading of Bill C-53, An Act to implement the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States. The convention is an international treaty establishing the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes, ICSID. Bill C-53 will implement the ICSID convention for Canada.
Allow me to give hon. members of this House, first, a description of what ICSID is, second, an overview of the bill and what it does, and lastly, an explanation of the benefits of this convention for Canada and Canadian businesses.
ICSID is an organization devoted to the resolution of international investment disputes between states and nationals of other states through arbitration and conciliation.
ICSID provides mechanisms for arbitration and conciliation of such disputes provided that both the state of the investor and the host state are parties to ICSID. This means that once Canada ratifies ICSID, a Canadian investor abroad in any of the 143 countries that have already ratified ICSID may have recourse to ICSID to resolve disputes that may arise with the country in which it is doing business.
ICSID is a highly reputable World Bank institution based in Washington, D.C., and one of the most frequently used institutions for investment arbitrations.
ICSID and international investment arbitration have traditionally been used in cases of expropriation or nationalization. A hypothetical example is a takeover by a host government of a Canadian business exploiting natural resources such as oil or minerals. Such an expropriation may represent a substantial loss for the investor and fair compensation is not always easily obtained.
However, the Canadian investor may have insisted on an investment agreement with an ICSID arbitration clause before investing, or Canada may have an investment treaty with the host government making reference to ICSID arbitration. If so, once Canada ratifies ICSID, the Canadian investor owning the business will have the right to use ICSID arbitration to pursue fair compensation for its losses before an independent arbitral panel.
ICSID provides an efficient, enforceable mechanism for such dispute resolution. This is why our government believes ICSID is a good way to protect Canadian business and its investment in foreign countries. It also complements our investment protection treaties and existing arbitration clauses in investment contracts of Canadian businesses.
Bill C-53 will implement this convention. This bill needs to be passed before Canada can ratify the convention. This bill will make an ICSID award enforceable in a Canadian court. It will ensure that persons using conciliation under the convention cannot abuse that process. This bill also provides for governor in council appointments of persons to ICSID lists of potential panellists and it provides privileges and immunities as required by the convention.
The key provision making ICSID awards enforceable is clause 8, which states:
(2) The court shall on application recognize and enforce an award as if it were a final judgment of that court.
This provision will apply to an ICSID award for or against Canada or a foreign government. This provision is the key to the ICSID system for enforcing arbitration awards.
An ICSID award is reviewable by an ICSID tribunal, but not by national courts. Once final, an ICSID award will be recognized and enforced in Canada as if it is a final judgment of a Canadian court.
While Canada will be giving full effect to awards, in turn the convention guarantees similar enforcement in all states that are party to ICSID. Thus, Canadian businesses with an ICSID award in their favour have a very powerful tool to ensure the award is paid. This ensures the protection of their rights and interests in foreign countries.
There are three important related provisions. Clause 6 makes the act binding on the Crown. This ensures that awards against the federal government can be enforced.
Clause 7 prevents a party from seeking court intervention by way of judicial review applications or applications to a similar effect. A party cannot therefore attack the validity of a final ICSID award.
Clause 8 also gives all superior courts, including the Federal Court of Canada, jurisdiction to enforce ICSID awards.
The provisions with respect to conciliation are brief. Clause 10 ensures that the ICSID conciliation process can be conducted in a manner that is without prejudice to the rights of the parties. In other words, testimony given during conciliation cannot be used in other proceedings. This gives investors a further option to ensure their rights are respected.
I should also mention that the bill proposes provisions ensuring the required privileges and immunities for the centre, its employees and its arbitrators. Such immunities guarantee the independence of the tribunal when seated in Canada.
As I indicated before, once adopted, the settlement of international investment disputes act will allow Canada to ratify the ICSID Convention. In today's world, there are many situations where Canadian businesses could be significantly harmed by foreign governments' activities or decisions.
Canadian businesses are increasingly active in foreign markets. They invest in foreign countries by buying plants, establishing new businesses or acquiring rights to natural resources, for example. While disputes with foreign governments affect only a small portion of the $465 billion in assets owned by Canadian investors abroad, when disputes do arise, mechanisms such as ICSID are necessary to ensure that the dispute is resolved fairly and efficiently.
We as a government have worked hard to promote Canada abroad, facilitate the free flow of international investment and help Canadian businesses succeed abroad.
To date, Canada has negotiated 22 foreign investment protection and promotion agreements, or FIPAs, and is actively negotiating others. These agreements provide for investor state dispute settlement by means of arbitrations.
ICSID arbitration is an option under these agreements but only if both countries are party to ICSID. These agreements create a more predictable and transparent climate for Canadian investors abroad by setting out rules for the treatment of investors and offering dispute settlement to adjudicate claims when their rights have been violated.
Canadian investors who need to use dispute settlement to enforce their rights, whether those rights exist pursuant to a FIPA, an FTA or an investment contract with an arbitration clause will welcome this bill. Promoting fair trade rules and equitable treatment for our businesses must go hand in hand with efficient dispute resolution mechanisms that allow investors to obtain redress.
We have proposed this bill today to pave the way for ratification of the ICSID Convention. Canadian businesses demand that Canada join this important convention to ensure protection of their investments abroad and because it is consistent with our foreign trade investment policy.
This convention entered into force in 1966, over 40 years ago, and 143 states have ratified the convention, including most of our major trading partners. This represents virtually three-quarters of all the states in the world. By way of comparison, there are 191 states that are members of the UN.
The ICSID Convention represents one of the most ratified treaties in the world and Canada is not yet a party to it.
This government is committed to fair international trade rules. We are committed to protecting Canadians' interest throughout the world and this is why we take action today for the implementation of the ICSID Convention.
Canadian businesses support the adoption of this convention. The convention is good for investment in this country, as well as Canadian investors abroad. It ensures efficient resolution of disputes between governments and foreign investors. Those are the reasons that our government presents Bill C-53 for second reading.
Settlement of International Investment Disputes Act May 15th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I wish to split my time with the member for Macleod. I would ask for unanimous consent.