Scott Brison

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, September 15th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening with interest and some disbelief to the pathological words coming from the NDP members today who, in their description of Colombia and of the Uribe government, completely ignore the reality of what is happening in Colombia. The fact is that the murders, the attacks he describes, have been a product of the narco-economy, the FARC guerrillas fueled by drug money, the drug gangsters fueled by drug money, and the civil war fueled by drug money.

How on earth does providing legitimate economic opportunities and jobs in the real economy through legitimate trade, and helping the Colombian people wean themselves away from the narco-economy, in any way, shape or form risk human rights, labour rights and the environment?

We already have a commercial relationship with Colombia, yet it does not have a robust, rules-based structure around labour and the environment. This particular trade agreement has the most robust labour and environmental agreements of any trade agreement Canada has ever signed.

How does introducing a rules-based structure around labour rights make things worse? Why does the hon. member not just stand up and admit that the NDP is against every free trade agreement and sit back down?

Instead of that, the New Democrats are trying to hoist it so that it cannot go to committee. Are they afraid that at committee the truth will come out and people will actually learn that there are some strong advantages to free and open trade in a rules-based structure with countries like Colombia, as we help--

[International Trade, September 15th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, seven months and no results from the government.

A recent CIBC report confirms that buy American is smothering Canadian growth. Canadian exports to the U.S. have plummeted 35% this year. Canadians cannot trust the Conservatives to protect Canadian jobs. Trade is clearly an area of federal responsibility, but the only leadership in Canada has come from provinces and municipalities.

Why have the Conservatives failed so miserably to protect Canadian jobs from American protectionism?

[International Trade, September 15th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the protectionist measures in the Buy American Act are decimating Canadian jobs. Canadian exports to the U.S. have dropped by more than 35% this year. The Buy American Act has been in place for seven months and we are still waiting for Canada to be exempted.

Why are the Conservatives unable to obtain any concessions from the United States to protect Canadian workers?

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, September 14th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Toronto Centre and I met with the UN High Commission on Human Rights representative, Christian Salazar, in Colombia. The UNHCHR is working closely with the minister of defence and with other ministers, ensuring that there is a co-operative and legitimate approach to the issues of rights and labour rights, the issues of impugnity, demobilization of paramilitary groups. All these issues are important to the people of Colombia, and the UN is actively involved in that. In fact, Mr. Salazar indicated to us that there had been significant progress by—

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, September 14th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is absolutely right that labour rights and environmental protection both have to be a strong part of any trade agreement that Canada signs. This agreement does have the most robust measures we have ever agreed to in of our trade agreements. In its annual report, the ILO has recognized that Colombia has made progress.

Obviously a country like Colombia, that has emerged from 40 years of internal strife and civil war largely fuelled by the narco-economy, has a long way to go. Our presence in Colombia has been overwhelmingly positive for the workers and for the people of Colombia, so a rules-based system around our presence and strengthening and fortifying our presence in labour areas has the potential to improve. However, this is quite a robust agreement on labour rights. When we compare this with some of the other ones Colombia signed, it is actually more robust.

With regard to the issue of whether a side agreement is less robust than a full chapter treatment, I have talked with some trade lawyers who believe that either can work and that they are equally strong and enforceable, but it depends on the chapter or the side agreement. However, either can work and can be enforceable. Many trade lawyers feel this approach is a reasonable one and sufficiently robust.

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, September 14th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, this agreement does provide significant investor protection for Canadian companies doing business in Colombia. We already have a fairly significant level of trade and investment between our countries, without the additional benefits of a rules-based approach in governance to labour and the environment that is afforded by this treaty, the most robust provisions on labour and the environment of any trade agreement we have signed.

Again, the member for Toronto Centre and I met with Canadian companies doing business in Colombia. Canadian companies are recognized in Colombia as being strong and responsible practitioners of corporate social responsibility and have received recognition and awards for environmental and human rights practices. In fact, they represent great ambassadors for our values in Colombia. Even before this trade agreement, we have seen in recent weeks Brookfield Asset Management announce a $500 million fund to invest in Colombia. We have seen recently SNC-Lavalin open an office in Bogota.

Canadian companies are investing. We just want to ensure there is a rules-based system to strengthen labour and environmental provisions, which can only improve the situation for the people of Colombia.

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, September 14th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it is in the interest of Canadians and in the interest of Colombians that we partner with them to provide Colombians with real opportunities outside of the narco-economy.

While I understand the intent of the hon. member in terms of citing the real danger of the narco-economy, I do not understand the logic of preventing the people of Colombia from having legitimate economic opportunities. The fact is if we really want to help reduce the size of the narco-economy, we ought to engage in legitimate economic engagement.

The hon. member's arguments against free trade are consistent with that of his party on every free trade agreement. They are largely ideological. In fact, the member for Toronto Centre and I met with union representatives in Colombia, representing textile workers, professionals and engineers, and other union organizations that support the free trade agreement.

The fact is there is a significant level of support among workers and among labour unions in Colombia representing private sector employees, people who want to have opportunities outside of the narco-economy.

If he is, as he has stated, opposed to the narco-economy in Colombia, then he ought to support measures that provide legitimate economic opportunities to the people of Colombia and economically engage them as opposed to ideologically abandoning them.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, September 14th, 2009]

With respect to the Report on Plans and Priorities 2009-2010 for the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, for each fiscal year between 2004-2005 and 2011-2012, what is the actual and planned spending for each component program falling under Program Activity 3 International Commerce?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, September 14th, 2009]

With regards to the 2007-2008 Departmental Performance Report for the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade: (a) in section 2.2.1--Program Activity #1--Trade Policy and Negotiations: given $58.1 million in planned spending versus $45.7 million in actual spending in the fiscal year of 2007-2008, what programs received less funding than anticipated, by how much for each program, and for what reason; and (b) in section 2.2.3--Program Activity #3--International Business Development – in reference to Planned Outcome #3--“Enhanced trade finance and risk management tools for high-risk markets”, for fiscal year 2007-2008, what specific support functions and risk management tools were discontinued, when they were discontinued, (i) what is the budget for each, for the fiscal years of 2005-2006, 2006-2007 and 2007-2008?

[Questions on the Order Paper, September 14th, 2009]

With regards to government advertising: (a) how much money has the government spent on newspaper and magazine advertising to provide information to the public about government programs, services, or initiatives, since January 1, 2006, giving particulars of (i) how much has been spent by each department or agency of government, (ii) the subject and nature of each advertisement, (iii) the newspaper or magazine in which each ad was published, (iv) the name and publication location; and (b) what are the dates of the newspaper or magazine issues in which the advertisements were published?