Tracey Ramsey

[International Trade, October 23rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, at committee last week, we heard from Finance and CBSA officials, who told us that out of 74 applications, only 36 companies have been approved for duty drawback or relief. The support promised by the current government is not reaching those who desperately need it. Some businesses are giving up altogether, because of the long wait times and red tape. The government is ignoring the reality for steelworkers and they are being laid off as small businesses are struggling to keep their doors open. Will the government finally do the right thing, and strike a national tariff task force?

[International Trade, October 16th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the concessions to Trump in the USMCA are many, from supply management to patent extensions to weak cultural protections, but it still boggles the mind that the government signed a trade deal with the U.S. and Mexico without negotiating an end to tariffs on steel and aluminum.

At committee today, we heard clearly that under these tariffs, Canada is facing massive losses in our manufacturing sector that we will not be able to recover from. Jobs are leaving, and we will not get them back.

How long do Canadian steelworkers need to wait before the Liberals negotiate a permanent removal of the tariffs?

[International Trade, October 4th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, a strong position would have not been to leave the table without those tariffs removed.

Do the Liberals not realize that we are talking about tens of thousands of jobs in small shops across our country? While the big players are painfully weathering the storm, small shops are fighting to keep their doors open. While Liberals keep bragging about the USMCA, we are talking about small businesses and shops that are drowning under these tariffs.

The NDP has called on the government to strike a national tariff task force to help with this urgent situation. Will Liberals agree to the task force to help small business, or have they turned their backs on them too?

[International Trade, October 4th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, every single day, workers in Windsor, Essex and Ontario have to face the fact that the government has abandoned them. Failing to get steel and aluminum exempted from U.S. tariffs in the new USMCA deal is clear proof that the government does not care about Canadian workers. Experts have said that it does not make sense to make an agreement where there would be a tariff on a particular good.

What do Liberals have to say to the tens of thousands of families whose livelihoods have been left on the line because of their failure to get an exemption?

[International Trade, October 3rd, 2018]

Madam Speaker, the middle class in Canada is steel and aluminum workers, and steel and aluminum workers have called this deal a sellout because of the complete and utter failure of the government, in signing this deal, to remove the steel and aluminum tariffs.

I want to read a quote from Ken Neumann, who is the Canadian director of United Steelworkers here in Canada. We are talking about the livelihood of tens of thousands of people, so I want to read one line.

The Liberals made concession after concession, until the Trump administration got the deal it wanted.... So much for the “win-win-win” deal promised by the government.

These workers have been betrayed by the Liberal government.

[International Trade, October 3rd, 2018]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise on a question I had earlier this year on May 7. The question was about NAFTA and where we were at at that time. Of course there was a lot of information coming out of the United States at that time and Canadians were very worried about what type of deal we would reach. Now we know that Canada has signed on to the USMCA, a new name for the agreement, and many concessions were made by Canadians.

I will start with a positive. The auto provisions are good, and this is indicative of having people in the room who understood auto. The stakeholders who were in that room understood the impact of what was being negotiated there.

In very stark contrast, none of that happened in the CPTPP, which the Liberals are trying to ram through right now with the help of the Conservatives.

On the one hand, we had stakeholders in a room and we were able to achieve something. On the other hand, with another deal, there were no stakeholders, there was no consultation, no communication and we have given it up. While there is a positive in the USMCA, it is merely being cancelled out by what is happening to auto in the CPTPP. We cannot on one hand champion a sector and then on the exact same day turn around and sell that sector out in another trade agreement. It is bizarre what we have experienced in the House this week.

I want to talk about chapter 11 being removed. I want to thank New Democrats who have stood in the House. I want to thank labour and civil society that have fought to have this provision removed across the country. I congratulate all of them on this success. For years and years they mounted campaigns to have chapter 11 removed. It is a huge victory for them.

Again, in this confusing Liberal trade policy, we listened today to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of Foreign Affairs talking about how ISDS has been bad for Canada. I am pleased they have woken up to that fact, something they used to talk about when they were in opposition but forgot about when they became government. Under them, in CETA, we have created a brand new investor court system that they said was the gold standard of trade agreements. Now, in the CPTPP we are signing on to ISDS provisions again, on the very same day in the House. This is the conundrum of Liberal trade policy. On the one hand it is bad in one trade deal, but on the other, it is good in this trade deal. Canadians are baffled in trying to make sense of what the Liberal government is doing in terms of trade and on that file.

We also know that dairy has been sacrificed again. This is death by a thousand cuts. What we are talking about are losses that happened in CETA and CPTPP where the Liberals and Conservatives have joined to push through with dairy concessions. Under the Conservatives, at least there was some type of compensation that existed. That has completely evaporated under the Liberal government.

I want to read a tweet from the Dairy Farmers of Canada yesterday about compensation. This was directed to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. It said, “Compensations: Stop suggesting our livelihood can be bought”.

There is no amount of money that will bring a family farm back when it has been lost, and there is no amount of safety that is more important than our food safety in our country, and we are giving that up in this agreement.

We also know about the IP provisions. There is an increase to the cost of pharmaceuticals for Canadians, so my question is—

[Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation Act, October 3rd, 2018]

That means you can't answer my question.

Jobs were lost. Unbelievable.

[Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation Act, October 3rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I have never heard such an impassioned plea for jobs to leave our country. What we heard from the parliamentary secretary is that he approves of the 58,000 jobs that are going to leave our country under the signing of this and not only approves of it, but wants us to speed it up, which Liberals and Conservatives have joined hands to do today so that they can further harm our auto sector, our farmers and dairy farmers, our supply-managed farmers.

I do not think it is something to be incredibly proud of today. The member mentioned labour. Who is opposed to this deal and thinks it is bad for working people? The Canadian Labour Congress, Unifor, United Steel Workers, CUPE, UFCW, and I could go on and on. Working people are not fooled by flowery speeches in the House that say something is good for working people. The proof is in the pudding and it is not in here.

I would also like to say that there is broad access he mentioned for workers to come to our country and that is true. In chapter 12, we have offered that broad access and for the first time our building trades are now under threat officially in a trade agreement, which we heard from coast to coast to coast not to sign onto, that it was a dangerous provision.

I would also like to talk about auto workers because while we have some provisions in the new U.S.-Mexico-Canada deal that auto is quite happy with, they are very unhappy with the CPTPP. When the member talks about chains being supported, what is going to be harmed are auto supply chains.

I have a specific question for the parliamentary secretary and I hope it will not be talking points coming back at me because it will be disrespectful to auto workers. How will the auto side letter in the CPTPP be good for Canada's auto sector?

[Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation Act, October 3rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for working very hard on the agricultural file and making sure that farmers' voices are heard in the House, because certainly we have folks on both sides of the aisle who, with the CPTPP, are happy to throw our farmers under the bus. Even the compensation to farmers that originally existed under the Conservatives has completely evaporated under the Liberal government. It is gone. There is nothing for the market share that has been opened. I thank him for that work.

What he is saying is completely factual. We are already tariff-free with 97% of the CPTPP countries we have signed on with. This deal is not about trade. This deal is about enshrining rights that go against our own sovereignty in our country through ISDS, which the Prime Minister admitted in the House today is a regressive provision that needs to be removed. Why then, less than an hour after the Prime Minister left the House today, are the Liberals signing on to an agreement that includes this regressive provision?

Human rights, which my colleague mentioned, is another important issue that we can address effectively in trade deals. This Liberal government and the Conservative one before it failed to do even that basic minimum to enshrine human rights, and that is a shame.

[Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation Act, October 3rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, that comment was completely void of fact. The member talked about reading the agreement. Perhaps he should read it himself and understand what his own government, through Global Affairs Canada, is saying about the deal, because the job losses are acknowledged by Global Affairs.

There is very little increase to the GDP, some $4.2 billion in 22 years. Economists call that negligible. We trade that in one day. To say that over 22 years, to give up all these jobs, to jeopardize family farms is something he supports, the member should go back, read the agreement and understand what he signed on to. I can assure him that I have.

He mentioned CETA. Here we are a year on from signing CETA and we have lost exports to our CETA partners. They have increased imports. There is a flood of imports and our exports are lower now than when we signed a year ago.

His government can keep opening doors with bad trade deals all it wants, but the only thing that is happening through those doors is a flood into our country, which is costing us jobs. Our Canadian exporters are not seeing the benefit of trade for multiple reasons, which the government fails to address. I would encourage the member to go and read the CPTPP.