Official Report * Table of Contents * Number 087 (Official Version)

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to recognize a few of the outstanding seniors in my community who were recently recognized by the town of Markham.

The recipient of the Hall of Fame Award this year was Dennis Patchell. Dennis is bound to a wheelchair because of cerebral palsy, but that did not stop him from starting the Tabs for Chairs program, a worldwide program that has collected more than 3.5 billion aluminum can pull-tabs, giving almost 200 people wheelchairs.

Doreen Lawson, who has been involved with Older Adults in Action at the Markham Senior Centre for more than 10 years and has volunteered at the Markham-Stouffville Hospital, received the meritorious service award.

Certificates of Appreciation were presented to Philip Garnet, the Chair of the Board of Directors of Participation House in Markham, and Marjorie Nielsen who has been involved with Girl Guides of Canada for many years, has been a member of the Markham multicultural association and currently volunteers at the Markham Seniors Centre.

These amazing individuals continue to give back to our community and are yet another example of why I am so proud to represent such a great community.

* * *

Visitor Visas

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Gurbax Malhi (Bramalea—Gore—Malton, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, every week I meet with constituents to discuss solutions for various problems. The single most common issue that I am asked to address is the high rates of refusal for temporary residence visas.

Relatives and friends are denied entry to Canada for important events like birthday celebrations, weddings and funerals. Many applicants who have been granted visas in the past are now finding their applications being rejected without ever being told why.

The refusal by the government to address the needs of Canadians by amending the current practices for issuing visas and creating a bond system is only causing anguish for Canadians and their families.

I call on the government to immediately institute a system of visitor visa bonds and end the unfair treatment of these Canadians and their loved ones abroad.

* * *

[Translation]

375th Anniversary of Trois-Rivières

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Paule Brunelle (Trois-Rivières, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, last weekend, Cirque du Soleil wrapped up the celebrations for the 375th anniversary of the founding of Trois-Rivières with some magical moments for spectators.

Despite a last-minute, modest contribution from the federal government, the city of Trois-Rivières, with the help of its volunteers, the Government of Quebec and private sponsors, was able to host a series of activities throughout the year. Since January, the organizing committee has found some truly marvellous ways of drawing attention to the founding of the second francophone city in North America.

The anniversary celebrations are a testament to the pride that the people of Trois-Rivières have in their city and its founding, so pivotal in Quebec's history.

Congratulations to the organizers and volunteers on these wonderfully successful events. They showcased the vitality of our community and the talent of our many artists and would not have happened without the participation and overwhelming enthusiasm of all the people of Trois-Rivières.

* * *

[English]

Kelly Morrisseau

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Paul Dewar (Ottawa Centre, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, it has been over two years since the death of a young woman from Ottawa, Kelly Morrisseau. Ms. Morrisseau, a mother of three, was found murdered in Gatineau Park and her case remains unsolved.

According to the Native Women's Association of Canada, over 500 aboriginal women are missing or have been murdered across the country. Ms. Morrisseau's tragic death is an example of the violence faced by aboriginal women in Canada.

In honour of her memory and in support of her children, I will be hosting, along with the Native Women's Association of Canada, a screening of the film Finding Dawn on October 7 at 7 p.m. at Carleton University. We will be accepting donations to the Kelly Morrisseau Education Fund which raises money for her children.

I invite the community to join us at this event. I call upon the House and the government to take action so all aboriginal women and their families can find justice and safety in our communities.

Together, let us start investing in a better future for all aboriginal children.

* * *

Fire Services Exemplary Service Medal

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Ted Menzies (Macleod, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise to share a story of dedication and volunteerism.

A former resident of my riding of Macleod has recently been presented with the Fire Services Exemplary Service Medal by the Governor General.

For the past 27 years, Leonard Weiss has dedicated himself to preserving Canada's public safety, both as a volunteer and as an employee. He spent 12 years as a volunteer with the Claresholm Fire Department before moving to the north. He is currently the airport fire chief in Iqaluit, a position he has held for the past five years.

During the summer and into the fall in my riding and, indeed, across the entire country, volunteer firefighters have been busy with grass fires, forest fires, building fires, as well as fires caused by harvesting equipment.

I would like to extend a special note of gratitude to firefighters across the country for the work that they do. They run toward danger when many of us run away from it. We respect the important work they do, a necessary part of our communities.

* * *

(1410)

Fuel Prices

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Dan McTeague (Pickering—Scarborough East, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, something amazing is happening in the United States. Almost a decade after the Enron loophole was opened during a flawed attempt at deregulating the energy market, the Obama administration is looking to close it. However, here in Canada nothing is happening.

Two summers ago, as we all recall, gasoline prices soared to a national average of $1.45 per litre. Diesel, jet fuel and other heating distillates soon followed. High and volatile fuel prices drive up inflation and hurt Canadians, business and the energy industry itself.

Canadians deserve a government that will take these issues seriously. We now know that increased and unregulated speculation in the energy commodities market, including over the counter trades right here in Canada, and not market fundamentals, are the cause of these volatile energy prices. Governments around the world are taking this issue seriously and are looking for solutions.

To avoid a repeat of last summer, I am calling upon the Prime Minister to do more than say there is nothing that he can do. If our government is not part of the solution, then it is part of the problem. Canadians deserve a government that can indeed do better.

* * *

Emergency Aid Assistance

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Andrew Saxton (North Vancouver, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, four days ago, tropical storm Ketsana hit the Philippines, causing the nation's worst flooding in more than 40 years.

I want Canadians and the Filipino community in the Lower Mainland and across Canada to know that this government did not wait before responding to this tragedy. We immediately provided $50,000 to the Philippine National Red Cross and yesterday, the Minister of International Cooperation announced that Canada would make up to $5 million available for emergency and humanitarian assistance.

This storm has dramatically affected the lives of nearly two million people, but our international assistance will go a long way in helping to alleviate the suffering of victims as we provide food, water and basic shelter.

As the minister said, I can assure Canadians, and particularly the Filipinos and the Canadian community, that Canada and this government will do its part with compassion and do it responsibly.

Canada is continuing to lead on the international stage and Canadians can truly be proud of our accomplishments.

* * *

[Translation]

Ariane Moffatt

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Monique Guay (Rivière-du-Nord, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, singer-songwriter Ariane Moffatt is raking in the awards, and she deserves it. This young, talented Quebec artist received two prestigious awards this spring: the Juno for francophone album of the year and the Rapsat-Lelièvre prize, both for Tous les sens. Most recently, she was awarded the Diane and Lucien Barrière Foundation prize in Paris.

This prize is awarded every year to a performer selected by a jury of ten top names in the field. In 1999, the Groupe Lucien Barrière Hôtels et Casinos created a foundation to support contemporary creativity in the arts from literature to film and theatre, the only one of its kind in France.

The award includes a cash prize that Ariane will certainly find useful once she begins her 12-city tour of France.

My Bloc Québécois colleagues and I would once again like to applaud her exceptional talent, and we are sure that she will be very successful in France.

* * *

[English]

Economic Action Plan

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Bruce Stanton (Simcoe North, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, our government's number one priority is the economy and we continue to execute Canada's economic action plan. Because of our swift actions, 90% of the plan is already being implemented.

Funds have been committed to 7,500 projects and 4,000 have begun in the first six months of our 24-month plan.

Projects across the country are up and running, jobs are being created and communities across the land are seeing the benefit.

We have reduced taxes for families and businesses and implemented measures, such as the home renovation tax credit and the first time homebuyers' tax credit. We are helping the unemployed by extending EI benefits, making it easier to qualify, and expanding EI training programs.

Yet, the recovery is fragile. We are not out of the woods yet and that is why it is crucial that we continue to implement our plan.

This government is committed to staying on course. Doing anything else would be reckless and irresponsible.

* * *

(1415)

Kwantlen Polytechnic University

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Sukh Dhaliwal (Newton—North Delta, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, earlier this month, I met with Mary Jane Stenberg from Kwantlen Polytechnic University, one of the premier post-secondary institutions in British Columbia.

Kwantlen is rapidly become a first-rate centre for research and innovation in Canada. While it hopes to attract the best and the brightest from within our borders, it also hopes to bring in those from India, China and the Americas who can truly raise our game for the 21st century economy.

I urge the government to finally take proactive steps so we can be competitors, not gatekeepers, in the international student marketplace.

* * *

Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Lois Brown (Newmarket—Aurora, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, apparently the only person in Canada who wants an election is the Leader of the Opposition. This is only the latest example of just how out of touch he is with Canadians.

Another example is that, given the chance, he would reach further into Canadians' pockets and take more of their hard-earned money by imposing a slew of new taxes. After all, he calls himself a “tax and spend Liberal”. He brags that he was the first to push a carbon tax. He muses about raising the GST, and he openly admits that he will raise taxes.

The Liberal leader continuously demonstrates that he does not understand economics, as it does not take a rocket scientist to know that taking more money from Canadians will hurt the economy, not to mention the harm an election would do to our recovery.

It is becoming clearer by the day. The Liberal leader is out of touch and is not in it for Canadians. He is just in it for himself.

* * *

[Translation]

Natasha Roberge

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Claude Gravelle (Nickel Belt, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to salute a young woman in my riding of Nickel Belt, Natasha Roberge, who is in first year at Laurentian University and has her sights set on a teaching career.

Last week, Natasha was awarded a $16,000 scholarship by the Canada Company, a charity that pays tribute to soldiers who have died on duty and their families. Natasha's father, Warrant Officer Gaétan Roberge, died in Afghanistan a few days after Christmas last year.

The whole community is very proud of Natasha, and we wish her the best of luck in her studies.

* * *

Bloc Québécois

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Jacques Gourde (Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Bloc members voted against a proposal to help the Canadian workers who have been hardest hit by the global economic crisis.

They chose to follow the Liberals' example and betray the men and women who need help. I am talking about Canadians who have worked hard and paid into the employment insurance plan for years. Today, they are unemployed through no fault of their own. For those of us on this side of the House, it makes no sense for the Bloc to be allied with the Liberals against Canadians and Quebeckers.

Is that what they call standing up for Quebec? Is that what the Liberals call national unity?

All Canadians know what an election involves. Yesterday, we had yet more proof that neither the Bloc nor the Liberals really want to help these unemployed workers. They would rather force an election no one wants.

Canadians and Quebeckers can rest assured that the Conservative government is working to bring about an economic recovery.

* * *

Ghislain Bouchard

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Robert Bouchard (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, I was deeply saddened to learn earlier this week of the passing of Ghislain Bouchard, a great pioneer of the arts community of Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. A writer and friend of mine, Mr. Bouchard made his mark on the history of my region in spectacular fashion.

Everyone remembers Ghislain Bouchard as the creator of La Fabuleuse Histoire d'un Royaume, an amazing historical performance to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the region. With his unbridled creativity, Ghislain Bouchard put together, without realizing it, an enduring theatrical production that contributed greatly to the economy of the region. Over nearly 20 years, this first extravaganza of its kind in Quebec was acclaimed by some one million spectators.

Recipient of the Ordre national du Québec, Ghislain will be remembered for his many wonderful theatrical productions and artistic projects. He had the great admiration and profound respect of his fellow citizens.

Adieu, Ghislain, and thank you for everything.

* * *

(1420)

[English]

Infrastructure

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Scott Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, Gordon Landon is a Canadian hero, and you can bet your bottom infrastructure dollar he is. Setting aside his own political ambitions, he decided to blow the whistle on the multi-billion dollar boondoggle now known as shovelgate.

As a town councillor, Gordon always put principle above politics and people before partisanship. Obviously, that kind of commitment to stand up and speak the truth put him in direct contradiction to the Conservative game plan. The truth is Gordon carried out an enormous public service for all Canadian citizens.

Last week, Gordon pulled back the curtain on one of the most nefarious and despicable of schemes. What Gordon revealed was a mammoth misallocation of public funds in pursuit of a vote-buying scheme funnelling tens of millions of dollars into Conservative ridings throughout the country. Gordon's whistleblowing may have cost him his candidacy, but his noble actions will not be forgotten by the House.

Let us raise our glasses to a true Canadian hero, Mr. Gordon Landon.

* * *

Dave Batters

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Andrew Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to pay tribute to a former parliamentarian who tragically lost his battle with depression and anxiety this summer.

Dave Batters first came to this House in 2004. He was motivated to enter public life for all the right reasons, out of a deep love of his country and a deep commitment to his community.

In Parliament he championed criminal justice issues and introduced a private member's bill to protect victims of domestic violence.

I got to know Dave on a personal level, as well, and was impressed by his enthusiasm for everything he did and by his positive attitude. Dave was the consummate team player, always encouraging his colleagues and cheering them on.

At his funeral, Dave's friends praised him for his integrity, his honesty and his loyalty to those around him. Unfortunately, most recently Dave had begun to suffer from severe anxiety and depression. Parliamentary work often comes with a great deal of stress, and Dave found it difficult in the last few months of his career.

This summer we were all shocked and deeply saddened by his death. I know that it affected anyone who knew him or worked with Dave because it was so out of character with the Dave we remember. I know that we will remember the Dave who loved his family, loved his colleagues and felt passionate about the work that he did.

We would like Dave's wife, Denise who is here today in Ottawa, his parents and the rest of his family to know that our thoughts and prayers are with them.

ORAL QUESTIONS

[Oral Questions]

* * *

[English]

The Economy

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, Statistics Canada reported that the economy stalled in July.

While the government spent millions of dollars telling Canadians that everything was fine, experts do not agree. The deputy chief economist at the Bank of Montreal stated that the economy's flat performance is “a shocker”. It is not just “a shot across the bow”, said the bank. It is “more like a torpedo through the hull”.

Could the Prime Minister advise when he and his ministers plan to start bailing?

[Table of Contents]

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, while Canada's economic performance was flat in July, of course we did see growth in June, and this is a much better performance than we are seeing south of the border.

As I have said repeatedly, while we are seeing the beginnings of a global recovery, it is fragile. That is why the House of Commons needs to be at work on the economy, passing measures for the unemployed and not out forcing an unnecessary and wasteful election.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister tried to sell his softwood lumber deal to Canadians, he said it would buy peace in our time, but it cost Canadian industry $1 billion.

In the years since, Americans have filed two more grievances, and now the government will have to impose a new tax on our forestry companies. All of this is on top of layoffs at Tembec, Abitibi and Canfor, from Quebec to British Columbia.

What will the Prime Minister tell forestry workers today, that they are out of luck?

(1425)

[Table of Contents]

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, as the House well knows, there was a recent tribunal decision on back taxes against Canada in the order of $60 million.

That is not pleasant news, but it is sure a lot different from the $5 billion that the previous government had tied up in disputes with the United States.

That is why nobody in the provinces or in industry wants to go back to the bad old days and why we must keep making the softwood lumber agreement work.

[Translation]

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, a good government must protect our children from the tobacco industry.

But the Conservatives—at least a few of them—do not agree. The member from Beauce said: “Consumers must not be deprived of their legitimate free choice without justification. It is a question of principle.”

And now the chair of the Quebec Conservative caucus wants “to remove certain irritants from the law”.

Does the Prime Minister share the views of his MPs?

[Table of Contents]

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, this government introduced a bill to protect children from tobacco. The Liberal government refused for years to do so.

We have also heard some industry concerns. However, our priority continues to be to protect children from tobacco.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Pablo Rodriguez (Honoré-Mercier, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, he should perhaps explain that to his Quebec caucus.

In recent decades, a great deal has been accomplished in the fight against smoking. However, much, much more work is required. That is why we are surprised that a number of members of the Quebec caucus are working behind the scenes to oppose the bill that prohibits the sale of flavoured tobacco. Who does fruit- or candy-scented tobacco target? It targets our children and young teenagers, and they are against prohibiting these products.

Will the Prime Minister listen to his Quebec caucus and cigarette manufacturers or will he listen to us and protect our children?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Josée Verner (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister for La Francophonie, CPC):

As the Prime Minister mentioned, and in line with the government's position, Bill C-32 is a bill that seeks to protect our children. The objective has not changed.

Having said that, members from the Quebec City area are also concerned about the impact on Rothmans and we are confident that we will find a solution.

* * *

Softwood Lumber

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Pablo Rodriguez (Honoré-Mercier, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, we are looking out for the future of our children.

Three years ago, the government failed us by signing a sellout agreement with the U.S. It said that the agreement was not perfect, but it would prevent any problems in the future. We knew that was not true.

The proof: on Monday, an arbitration tribunal ruled that Canada has to pay $68 million in compensation to the United States. This is a disastrous ruling for forestry workers and it is further evidence of the Conservative government's incompetence.

Are the Conservatives waiting for our industry to fold? Are they waiting until there is not a single job left before taking action?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Stockwell Day (Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, the tribunal made its ruling a year ago. We appealed the decision. Now we have a final decision from this international tribunal.

One thing is very important, however: after the agreement was signed by this government, close to $5 billion was repaid to the industry here in Canada, not in the United States, where the money was the whole time the Liberals were in power.

We have accomplished things for the industry and we will continue to do so.

* * *

Tax Harmonization

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, negotiations between the Government of Quebec and the federal government over GST harmonization have stalled. The federal Minister of Finance is refusing to release $2.6 billion to Quebec unless it agrees to let Revenue Canada collect the GST and QST.

But Quebec signed a GST harmonization agreement in 1992. Why is the Prime Minister now deciding to put conditions on this agreement, and blocking the transfer of $2.6 billion that rightly belongs to Quebec?

(1430)

[Table of Contents]

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada has signed agreements with the provinces on GST harmonization based on a model established a long time ago by the previous government. We are able to offer the same terms to Quebec, and the Minister of Finance is in the process of negotiating with his provincial counterpart.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, Quebec's minister of intergovernmental affairs himself, Claude Béchard, admitted that negotiations on GST harmonization are far from being concluded; in fact, they are now stalled. I remind members that Ottawa owed $8 billion to Quebec, and compensation for the GST represents only one-third of the total amount.

Quebec harmonized its tax with the GST in 1992, and Quebec was designated as the one to collect it. Why is the government changing its mind? Is this the government's way of showing openness? Is this the government recognizing the Quebec nation, by giving Ontario and the Maritimes what it will not give to Quebec?

[Table of Contents]

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, once again, the previous government signed agreements with the provinces for GST harmonization. The model used with Quebec was completely different than with other provinces. Our government is clear. We are prepared to negotiate the same terms and the same contract with Quebec as with the other provinces, and the Minister of Finance is in the process of negotiating that with his provincial counterpart.

* * *

Softwood Lumber

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Claude Guimond (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, another issue is playing out much like sales tax harmonization. The $68 million in countervailing duties imposed by the London Court of International Arbitration will likely hurt Quebec. Ontario companies were responsible for 60% of the quota overrun, so they should be responsible for paying 60% of the penalty imposed by the court.

Will the Minister of International Trade take steps to ensure that Quebec companies are not penalized for Ontario's overrun?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Stockwell Day (Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, as I said, we appealed the decision several months ago. The court reviewed our appeal and once again ruled quite clearly that the industry had to pay the duty, as the tribunals said.

It is not within our power to decide otherwise. The tribunal made that clear.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Claude Guimond (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, the only thing that the companies and the U.S. government want is to get their hands on the $68 million.

Can the government provide assurance that the guilty Ontario companies will pay the fine on their over-quota exports and that Quebec will not end up footing the bill?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Stockwell Day (Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, our government is continuing to provide plenty of support to the industry. For example, Export Development Canada has created a fund worth nearly $7 billion for forestry industries and companies to help finance several months of operations. There are also programs for workers. We will continue to support forestry companies. This is a difficult time for them, and we are here to help.

* * *

[English]

Taxation

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Jack Layton (Toronto—Danforth, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister's decision to impose a new tax on everything from diapers to gasoline to funerals is going to be a hardship on families, particularly as they are struggling with this economic crisis.

He thinks so highly of this new tax that he bribed Ontario and British Columbia with seven billion taxpayer dollars in order to impose and accept the new HST. He even brags in the media today that the HST will not be a big issue in the next election because consumers will have become used to it.

Does the Prime Minister also think that Canadians are going to be so forgetful that they are going to forgive him for his new death tax?

(1435)

[Table of Contents]

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I think that Canadians understand that provincial governments impose provincial taxes and federal governments impose federal taxes.

Yesterday, the members of the NDP were cheering and demanding a 7% GST. Let me assure the House that, under a Conservative government, the GST is not going to go above 5%.

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Jack Layton (Toronto—Danforth, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, that is a complete fabrication on the part of the Prime Minister. The HST memorandum of agreement says:

Canada and British Columbia will use their best efforts to enter [a harmonized tax deal] on or before September 30, 2009.

We know that the federal government did not consult with anybody, least of all the taxpayers, before it went along and pushed this new tax increase. Since today is the deadline for the B.C. agreement, could the Prime Minister tell us if he has either already signed it or that he is going to postpone the harmonized sales tax deal, reveal the details, and give more time for the citizens to say that they do not want his new tax?

[Table of Contents]

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, when I was a boy, my father used to say that I should work on things that I am good at. The NDP is not good at fighting taxes.

The NDP opposed cutting the federal sales tax. The NDP opposed reducing business taxes. It opposed our cuts to personal taxes. It opposed our cuts to seniors. The NDP never saw a tax it did not like and never saw a tax it did not want to hike. Everybody knows that.

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Jack Layton (Toronto—Danforth, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, what the Prime Minister is not so good at is saying that with a straight face.

[Translation]

Another problem raised by the increased sales tax is the aboriginal exemption. Aboriginal leaders have asked that the treaties be complied with. This type of exemption is in place in New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Nova Scotia.

Can the Prime Minister tell us whether he will impose the new harmonized sales tax on aboriginal people despite the treaties that are in place?

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I am a serious guy, but I do have trouble keeping a straight face when the NDP claims to be fighting taxes.

[Translation]

The government's position is clear. The provinces impose their own sales tax. Our government has lowered the GST twice. The NDP voted against these measures twice because the NDP is in favour of a 7% GST. We favour a 5% GST. So do Canadians.

* * *

[English]

Infrastructure

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Gerard Kennedy (Parkdale—High Park, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister refused to answer simple questions about the misspending of infrastructure money in New Brunswick. How about today we try the other side of the country, where it is even worse?

In British Columbia, the Prime Minister has now promised to give $158 million in extra government funds to his Conservative colleagues at the expense of the unemployed and their families in other parts of the province. Rather than focusing on jobs, the Prime Minister is focused on helping his Conservatives keep theirs.

Why should Canadians anywhere in this country trust the government?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. John Baird (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I am always excited to get up and talk about the great infrastructure investments that this government is making in the great province of British Columbia.

The biggest stimulus program with the biggest grant made anywhere in the country was made just last week by the Prime Minister of Canada. We are supporting green energy in northwestern British Columbia. It is a lot of effort to get a lot of diesel power generation off the grid, get more clean non-emission generation onto the grid. Where is that all happening? In an opposition riding.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Gerard Kennedy (Parkdale—High Park, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, for 10--

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

[Table of Contents]

The Speaker:

Order, please. The hon. member for Parkdale--High Park has the floor.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Gerard Kennedy:

Mr. Speaker, for 10 long months the unemployed in British Columbia have waited to even hear an announcement. The Prime Minister has his priorities badly mixed up. These are difficult times. He is supposed to be standing up for Canadians in need.

Instead, in B.C. he gave his own MPs an average of three times as much money as those in opposition ridings in the province. All the top 10 allocations went to hungry Conservatives. Two-thirds of his cabinet took those top 10 positions.

Will the Prime Minister explain today why he and his ministers are too busy dividing up the cash among themselves instead of looking after British Columbians who need the assistance?

(1440)

[Table of Contents]

Hon. John Baird (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, the member for Parkdale—High Park will always be remembered for making a great contribution to democracy and to the Conservative Party by his actions at the Liberal leadership convention in Montreal some three years ago.

Let us look at the commercial news today. The president of the Canadian Construction Association says the following:

We are starting to see a lot of competition for infrastructure projects...Many of our members say they are very busy and it will be one of the busiest seasons on record.

The building Canada fund is radical and it is making a significant difference in the remaking of our public infrastructure.

This government is working co-operatively with Liberal, New Democratic and Conservative governments right across the country. We are working hard. We are getting the job done. We are seeing job creation right across the province.

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Bonnie Crombie (Mississauga—Streetsville, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, the shovelgate saga continues. The photo op cameras keep rolling but the jobs are nowhere to be seen.

For months we have been told about infrastructure spending. Where is it? All we can see is Conservative pork-barrelling. The Parliamentary Budget Officer asked a month ago to see the numbers from the department. Its answer was four weeks of delay and it will still not say when it will have the numbers.

My question for the minister is, what is the holdup?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. John Baird (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, there are very few things that have been more un-Canadian than the actions of the member opposite. She actually had the gall and the nerve to protest outside of a Tim Hortons. Shame on her.

I was just looking at the September 21 Mississauga News where it states, “Money given to the City of Mississauga through the federal government's infrastructure stimulus funding program is rapidly bearing fruit”, even in the member opposite's own constituency.

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Bonnie Crombie (Mississauga—Streetsville, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, we know the real reason the Conservatives will not give the numbers is that the money is not getting out and when it does, it goes to the Conservatives' pet projects. That is what they are hiding from the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

Conservative cabinet ministers in Ontario have received two to three times more funding despite higher unemployment elsewhere in the province. This Conservative rewards program is unfair and it punishes hard-working Canadians who did not vote Conservative.

Will the minister come clean and open the books for all Canadians?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. John Baird (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, all the member has to do is talk to her colleague from Willowdale or go to the World Wide Web and she can see an example of all of the great infrastructure projects that we are working on.

We are working constructively with the Liberal Government of Ontario to make things happen. Let us look at what the mayor of the Township of King had to say to my colleague from Oak Ridges—Markham:

We really appreciate your dedication and hard work in making this dream become a reality for our township. This project is a great example of the federal, provincial and municipal governments working together to enhance [our] community.

Do members know who said that? It was Mayor Margaret Black, who is now the Liberal candidate running in Newmarket--Aurora.

* * *

[Translation]

Canada-U.S. Relations

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Serge Cardin (Sherbrooke, BQ):

Mr. Speaker—

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

[Table of Contents]

The Speaker:

Order, please. The hon. member for Sherbrooke.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Serge Cardin:

Mr. Speaker, under NAFTA, the United States government does not have the right to engage in preferential purchasing. However, President Obama's plan gets around the problem by forcing states and municipalities, which do not come under NAFTA rules, to buy American exclusively.

Although an agreement appears imminent, does the Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway realize that the real problem is not the buy American act, which has been around since 1933, but rather the provisions of Mr. Obama's plan?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Stockwell Day (Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question, because we have been working hard on this file. The Prime Minister, the provincial premiers and I have taken action. We now have an agreement between our provinces and territories, which, in our opinion, meets the requirements of the buy American act. We have sent the plan to the Americans and we will continue to work on the matter.

(1445)

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Serge Cardin (Sherbrooke, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, if the agreement had to be based on full reciprocity as indicated by the Prime Minister, that would mean breaking away from one of the benefits of NAFTA, and would prevent Quebec, the provinces and the municipalities from using preferential purchasing as a tool for economic development.

Does the minister realize that full reciprocity could have a very negative impact on small and medium-sized businesses?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Stockwell Day (Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, many people have said that the process we followed with the provinces was unprecedented, because we respected the jurisdictions of the provinces and their goals. I particularly appreciate the work of the Premier of Quebec, Jean Charest, who showed leadership amongst the provinces and encouraged them all to sign the agreement. Thanks to his hard work and that of the other provincial premiers, we can now hope for a solution.

* * *

Labour

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Nicole Demers (Laval, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in answering a question on preventive withdrawal, the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development said that it is important to her government to treat men and women equally. The minister could start by ensuring that female workers in Quebec are all treated the same way.

Does the minister plan to implement a preventive withdrawal program for female workers in Quebec who work under the Canada Labour Code?

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Rona Ambrose (Minister of Labour, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, the member is spreading erroneous and false information about the rights of pregnant women who are in the federal jurisdiction workforce.

The reality and the truth of the matter is that if a woman at any time feels that her health and safety or the health and safety of her fetus is at risk due to any health issue, including the H1N1 virus, she has the right, under the law, to refuse to go to work and continue to be paid.

[Translation]

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Nicole Demers (Laval, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, the minister is missing the point. The most shocking thing about this is that, under the Canada Labour Code, Quebec companies already have to provide their employees with CSST coverage for workplace accidents.

Why refuse to do the same for pregnant women working in Quebec who are calling for preventive withdrawal?

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Rona Ambrose (Minister of Labour, CPC):

Again, Mr. Speaker, it is important for all women who work in the federal jurisdiction, particularly pregnant women who are concerned about their own health and safety and the health and safety of their fetuses, to know that they do have rights. If they feel in any way any risk to their safety or the safety of their fetuses, they are able to discontinue work. They can refuse to work and will continue to be paid.

* * *

Automotive Industry

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Francis Valeriote (Guelph, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, we learned today that the Canadian Secured Credit Facility, which the finance minister promised in December, January, April, May and then again in June, has yet to offer Canadian car purchasers, lessees and dealers any chance to get the loans they need. It is not working. The money is not out there.

Lending money to GM and Chrysler is only half the equation. Helping car sales and leasing by loosening up credit is the other half: no sales, no industry.

We cannot rely on the minister's promises at all. Will he ever keep his word?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Tony Clement (Minister of Industry, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, in fact, in this case, I would be happy to educate the hon. member.

Private investors and financial institutions have been leveraging the CSCF account in order to ensure there is a market for these kinds of ABS securities. In fact, Ford Credit was able to issue $600 million of ABS in the public markets. Ford also raised some $3 billion in private placements over the summer months, again leveraging the CSCF.

Working with my colleague, the Minister of Finance, we have improved this fund most recently and we believe it will continue to operate for the benefit of Canadians.

(1450)

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Francis Valeriote (Guelph, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, that is contrary to what has been said by the Business Development Bank.

In today's Financial Post, the VP of the Business Development Bank stated, “I don't know when a deal will happen...But I think”, she thinks, “we will see something before Christmas”. That is one full year since it was announced.

The Canadian Automobile Dealers Association says, “That's one of the biggest problems facing the industry”.

Car dealers cannot borrow money for cars. Auto jobs and taxpayer loans to the industry will only be protected if sales increase.

If the finance minister does not want this money out the door, why does he not just say so?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Tony Clement (Minister of Industry, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, let me then put on the record that this fund already levered $3.6 billion in the first tranche. We have improved the program for the next months. It is working for consumers and for credit facilities in the auto sector.

The hon. member is mistaken. If he would actually spend his time researching rather than trying to force an unnecessary and expensive election, maybe he would have better questions.

* * *

Health

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Anita Neville (Winnipeg South Centre, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health knows of the poverty in first nations communities. She knows of the challenging living conditions.

Her department shipped body bags to prepare them for H1N1. We also know she refused to take responsibility. The minister said that it was regrettable. That is not good enough.

When will the minister apologize to first nations peoples for sending body bags to those Manitoba communities?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Leona Aglukkaq (Minister of Health, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I know full well what it is like to live in first nations communities because I come from one.

I have said that what happened before was insensitive and offensive and I have asked my deputy minister to investigate the matter. I have had meetings with Grand Chiefs Ron Evans and David Harper in Manitoba in regard to the situation. Once I receive the information and a full report, I will travel back to Manitoba to meet with the chiefs to discuss the situation.

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Anita Neville (Winnipeg South Centre, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, I hope an apology will be coming.

The Minister of Health misleads Canadians by telling them that first nations are prepared for H1N1. She claims that 90% of communities have a pandemic plan. Yesterday, the grand chief of MKO told us that only two of his thirty communities had a plan. That does not sound like 90%.

When will the minister stop misleading Canadians, start working with first nations and develop a truly national pandemic plan?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Leona Aglukkaq (Minister of Health, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, we have been working with the provinces, territories and first nations communities to develop the pandemic plan.

I met with all the chiefs in British Columbia this week and addressed the National Assembly. As well, I have been to Manitoba five times to meet with the chiefs and Saskatchewan, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. I have been working very closely with all first nations communities in our country to develop their plans.

We have a plan in place and we are acting on it.

* * *

Fisheries and Oceans

[Table of Contents]

Mr. James Lunney (Nanaimo—Alberni, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, in coastal B.C. questions are being raised about the prospect of lighthouses being destaffed. In fact, six of these lighthouses are in my riding.

B.C. Conservative MPs have personally championed the importance of these light stations in the past and in recent times. In fact, our party prevented previous Liberal attempts to close light stations in B.C. and in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Could the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans update the House on the latest status on this important issue?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Gail Shea (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the input regarding the gradual automation and destaffing of lighthouses in B.C. and Newfoundland and Labrador.

With rapidly developing technology, an ever-changing technology, light stations in the rest of the country and around the world have been fully automated for quite some time now, and it is clear that mariner safety has not been compromised. However, it is my understanding that many light stations in British Columbia and Newfoundland and Labrador are located in remote areas, where lightkeepers perform a range of additional services.

I have asked therefore that a further review of the extent of these services at the remaining staffed light stations be undertaken and no further lighthouses will be destaffed until that review is completed.

* * *

(1455)

Afghanistan

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government continues to undermine the Military Police Complaints Commission's hearings into detainee transfers in Afghanistan leading to torture.

The government has ordered subpoenaed witnesses to say nothing to the commission. Now it has been revealed that a secret military police investigation took place and the results have not been made public.

Is this the government's response to the charges of Canadian complicity in torture in Afghanistan? What is the government trying to hide from the Canadian people?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Peter MacKay (Minister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that is simply not true. The military has been co-operating with the MPCC. In fact, we have provided dozens of witnesses to provide testimony. We have provided hundreds of documents. That board will say so itself.

With respect to this evidence, there is sensitive information. There are national security considerations. There is information that has to be vetted.

We are co-operating with the commission. We will continue to do so, and the board itself has said so.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the issue was sexual assault of young boys and today it is a gag order, hiding from torture allegations.

Now the Minister of National Defence is saying that Canada is prepared to continue the mission in Afghanistan beyond 2011. He said this despite countless promises by the Prime Minister that Canadian troops would not remain in Kandahar beyond that date and despite a vote in the House confirming 2011 as the redeployment date for our troops.

Is the defence minister violating the will of the House and breaking the government's word to the people of Canada on our Afghan mission?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Peter MacKay (Minister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, that was a remarkable rhetorical flourish from the member for St. John's East. It is amazing how many falsehoods he was able to get into one question.

We have said repeatedly, and the Prime Minister has repeated it, as have I, that we will respect the motion that was passed by the House of Commons. We cannot fight for democracy in Afghanistan and not respect the democracy in the House of Commons.

I would ask the hon. member to go back and read the record and get his facts straight.

* * *

[Translation]

The Environment

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Bernard Bigras (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, it is becoming more obvious by the day that this government intends to do as little as possible when it comes to the environment. Manufacturers of electric cars attending a conference this week in Montreal are calling on the federal government to provide incentive programs for buyers.

Rather than denying that climate change is real, why does this government not implement targeted programs to help develop alternatives to the conventional automobile?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Jim Prentice (Minister of the Environment, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc should read today's news. As we said, our budget is clear. We will develop an integrated North American carbon exchange system. Today, in the United States, Senators Boxer and Kerry introduced legislation with the same target as that adopted by our government two years ago. These are Canadian targets. The Bloc should support our efforts.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Bernard Bigras (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, the Americans are working on and introducing a bill, but we are still waiting for the government's bill. That is the reality.

The government did not hesitate to make $10 billion available to the auto industry in Ontario but when the time comes to give a helping hand to the green economy, it does nothing.

The Prime Minister justified his rejection of the California standards adopted by Quebec by saying that he wanted to align his position with that of Obama. Now that Obama has accepted the California standard will the federal government follow suit?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Jim Prentice (Minister of the Environment, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, that is not the case.

I am surprised today. The Bloc and their coalition partners signed an agreement last November to bring down the Canadian government. The agreement stated that the Liberals, the Bloc and the NDP support a continental emissions exchange system. I am surprised today by the change in direction of the opposition, which wants a continental system without the continent.

* * *

[English]

Afghanistan

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Bob Rae (Toronto Centre, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Foreign Affairs about Afghanistan.

The motion that we passed in the House was very unambiguous and very clear with respect to Canadian troops being redeployed out of Kandahar by December 2011. Certain comments have been made by other ministers and by other candidates for the Conservative Party with respect to the intentions of the Conservative Party post-2011.

My question for the Minister of Foreign Affairs is about Canada's presence in Afghanistan. Is he sticking to the motion that was passed by the House in March 2008?

(1500)

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Lawrence Cannon (Minister of Foreign Affairs, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I will say this clearly and succinctly so that the member will understand. Yes, we are sticking to that motion. Yes, the Minister of National Defence answered that question previously with the same response that we always give. We are putting an end to our military combat mission by 2011, and that is clear.

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Bob Rae (Toronto Centre, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, the problem is that yesterday outside the House the minister said something else. The other problem is—

An hon. member: No, he didn't.

Hon. Bob Rae: The record will stand. The record will stand.

Mr. Speaker, what I would like to ask the minister is very clearly it states that Canadian forces will be redeployed out of Kandahar by December 2011. It is unambiguous and clear.

I would like to ask the minister, how is that compatible with the statements by the minister, as well as the statements of the candidate who is running in Ajax? The two statements are incompatible.

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Lawrence Cannon (Minister of Foreign Affairs, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, the answer to his question is yes. I would strongly recommend that the hon. colleague read the transcript so that it will be clear. He might not understand what is written, but we all understand that is what it means.

* * *

Automotive Industry

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Industry.

As I am sure he knows, the auto workers at Ford Talbotville are facing the closure of that plant within the next two years. Many of these workers live in my riding and contribute significantly to the tax base and the prosperity of our community. The government has done precious little to save those auto jobs.

Will the minister come with me to the plant gate at Ford and explain this lack of action to the workers at Ford?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Tony Clement (Minister of Industry, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member may be aware, because it was well publicized, that this government has been supporting the Canadian auto sector and, in doing so, supporting the Canadian economy from coast to coast. That is what the finance minister indicated in his most recent report to Canadians as well and that is what the Prime Minister and his leadership did in conjunction with the United States.

Of course, members of the NDP voted against all of that, as they vote against anything that will help save our economy. That is their record. Perhaps she should explain that at the gate to the workers in her community.

* * *

International Aid

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (Winnipeg North, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, typhoon Ketsana has left 246 known dead and flooded the homes of nearly two million families in the Philippines, creating a crisis in food and shelter. The government says the most it will do is contribute about $1.50 per family in total.

Could the minister tell us what else is being considered and whether or not DART, our armed forces disaster assistance response team, which has world-renowned expertise in disaster relief, is being made available to help on the ground? While she is at it, could she give the House an update on any assistance being provided in the face of the tsunamis and the earthquake in Southeast Asia?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Bev Oda (Minister of International Cooperation, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, as the House knows and as Canadians know, Canada always responds to those who are facing disaster. We are doing it responsibly. Currently we are assessing the actual needs, the appropriate medicines and what will be needed for those in all areas facing the storms, the tsunami and the floods that are being experienced.

We are monitoring it. As I said yesterday, Canada and Canadians will respond compassionately and in a fully responsible way.

* * *

Employment Insurance

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Cathy McLeod (Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, yesterday members in the House voted on second reading of Bill C-50. This bill was introduced by our Conservative government to provide extra weeks of support through EI to long-tenured workers who have been hardest hit by the global recession. This is the fair and right thing to do. This bill is yet another way that our government is helping unemployed Canadians.

Could the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development please provide the House with an update on Bill C-50?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Diane Finley (Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to report that last night in the House Bill C-50 passed second reading. This is a bill that is going to provide extra support to Canadians who have paid EI premiums for a long time and are really having a tough time finding a job in these tough economic times.

Sadly, the Liberals voted against this bill. Shame on them. It is just further evidence that the Liberal leader does not care about the unemployed. Not only did Liberals walk out during our EI panels to help the unemployed this summer, but last night the Liberal leader, instead of helping the unemployed, was helping raise money for an unneeded election.

* * *

(1505)

Agriculture and Agri-Food

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Wayne Easter (Malpeque, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, as you know, one of the defining characteristics of the government is to announce but never deliver.

The Minister of Agriculture announced in the spring he was going to challenge U.S. COOL; however, there is still no investigation. October 9 is a crucial date that must be met in order to achieve a WTO investigation. While the minister dilly-dallies, farmers go broke.

I have a simple question: Will the minister act before October 9, or by default, is he just admitting that he has an absolute record of failure when it comes to farmers?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Gerry Ritz (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, someone should read transcripts to the member for Malpeque. The Prime Minister raised this issue directly with the president on his last trip down there. My counterpart at trade has raised it with Ron Kirk in the U.S. at every opportunity. I have done the same with Secretary Vilsack. We are also making use of our allies in the U.S., working with their counterparts here in Canada, the meat trade as it were, to raise the issue down there. We have done that exceptionally well. We are in the consultation phase on the WTO challenge. We will raise it to the next level as soon as we have all the information that we require to win that challenge.

* * *

[Translation]

Airport Facilities

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Carole Lavallée (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, BQ):

Mr. Speaker, in April, Aérocentre YHU, DASH-L and the City of Longueuil announced a plan to build a new airport terminal at the Saint-Hubert airport thanks to a private investment of $20 million. The Saint-Hubert airport expansion project requires federal government funding for extending the runway.

Can the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities give us an update on the status of this request and tell us why no support has been offered yet, despite Conservative election promises in 2008?

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Hon. John Baird (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, obviously we are concerned about infrastructure spending at airports across the country and the airport in question. I would certainly be happy to take the member's renewed interest in the file back to my officials. I will report back to her in short order.

* * *

Nuclear Disarmament

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Paul Dewar (Ottawa Centre, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, at a time when President Obama is galvanizing the international community to focus on nuclear disarmament, Canada is justifying proliferation. In fact, the Minister of International Trade is out there encouraging proliferation as a trade policy.

Why is the government isolating our country when it comes to nuclear disarmament? Why does it not commit Canadian expertise to verification and disarmament instead? In fact, where is our team Canada for nuclear disarmament?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Stockwell Day (Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, it is very encouraging to see around the world especially in countries that are significantly developing, such as India, that they have a desire in their development to use clean energy in the years ahead. They have been pursuing an ongoing future of nuclear energy. Canada has a lot to offer in that particular aspect. We will continue to be with other countries signing nuclear cooperation agreements whereby the countries that are involved have to fully respect the International Atomic Energy Agency guidelines. This is not only helping the environment, but it discourages proliferation at the same time.

* * *

Identity Theft

[Table of Contents]

Mr. LaVar Payne (Medicine Hat, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, identity theft is considered by law enforcement officials as one of the fastest growing and most lucrative crimes in North America, especially for organized crime. Between January 1 and October 31, 2008, more than 9,000 Canadian victims of identity theft were reported, totalling more than $8 million. The Canadian Council of Better Business Bureaus estimated identity theft may cost consumers, credit card firms and other businesses more than $2 billion annually.

Could the minister reaffirm to the House what this government is doing to combat this growing crime?

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, in fact the government has reintroduced a bill that would take aim at identity theft and would give police the tools they need to stop this activity before the damage is done. We know that organized crime and modern technology are changing the criminal landscape to make identity theft easier than ever. I have been calling on the opposition to expedite the passage of this bill. This is the second time we have introduced the bill. What is the problem with those people? Let us get Bill S-4 passed.

* * *

Presence in Gallery

[Table of Contents]

The Speaker:

I draw to the attention of hon. members the presence in the gallery of Dr. Sein Win, Leader of the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma.

Some hon. members: Hear, hear!

* * *

House of Commons Calendar, 2010

[Table of Contents]

The Speaker:

Pursuant to Standing Order 28(2)(b), I have the honour to lay upon the table the House of Commons calendar for the year 2010.

* * *

(1510)

Points of Order

Oral Questions

[Points of Order]

[Table of Contents]

Mr. David McGuinty (Ottawa South, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, during question period, in response to a question put by the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, the Minister of the Environment misled the House of Commons in his answer. He said that today, United States senators Kerry and Boxer tabled a greenhouse gas emissions bill with targets that were identical to the targets he claims were set out two years ago by the government. These fossil fuel emissions targets in the United States are 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. They are hard caps, in contradistinction to the minister's intensity targets, which are based on 2006 as a baseline year, and are 20% by 2020.

The minister continues to deliberately mislead the Canadian people. He must apologize once again.

[Table of Contents]

The Speaker:

It sounds like a debate to me. Sometimes statements are made in the House with which hon. members disagree, but to suggest that that somehow constitutes a point of order puts the Chair in a position where the Chair has to decide on the accuracy of statements, which is totally beyond my competence.

In the circumstances, we will regard this as a matter for debate. The hon. member may want to have a discussion with the minister about the matter and maybe something will come of it in subsequent discussions in the House.

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

[Routine Proceedings]

* * *

[English]

Ways and Means

Notice of Motion

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Stockwell Day (Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 83(1), I have the honour to table a notice of a ways and means motion to amend the Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006.

I would ask that an order of the day be designated for consideration of the motion.

* * *

Justice

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(1) of the House of Commons and section 696.5 of the Criminal Code, I am tabling the annual report to Parliament in relation to applications of ministerial review, miscarriage of justice.

* * *

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the provisions of section 72 of the Access to Information Act and section 72 of the Privacy Act, I rise today to table the annual reports of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for the fiscal year 2008-09.

* * *

West Bank First Nations Self-government Agreement

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Chuck Strahl (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians and Minister of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, under the provisions of Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, copies of the 2006-07 annual report of the West Bank First Nations self-government agreement.

* * *

Indian Claims Commission

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Speaker, under the provisions of Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, copies of the 2008-09 annual report of the Indian Claims Commission.

* * *

[Translation]

Canada-U.S. Border

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Lawrence Cannon (Minister of Foreign Affairs, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, with leave of the House and pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I would like to table, in both official languages, the Framework Agreement on Integrated Cross-Border Maritime Law Enforcement Operations between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America, signed in Detroit on May 26, 2009.

* * *

(1515)

The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Lawrence Cannon (Minister of Foreign Affairs, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, with leave of the House and pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I would like to table, in both official languages, the Amendment of the Articles of Agreement of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (Board of Governors — Resolution No. 596, Part A).

* * *

Universal Postal Union

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Lawrence Cannon (Minister of Foreign Affairs, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, with leave of the House and pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I would like to table, in both official languages, the Acts of the 24th Congress of the Universal Postal Union, signed in Geneva on August 12, 2008.

* * *

Convention Between Canada and the Hellenic Republic

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Lawrence Cannon (Minister of Foreign Affairs, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, with leave of the House and pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I would like to table, in both official languages, the Convention Between Canada and the Hellenic Republic for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income and on Capital, signed in Athens on June 29, 2009.

* * *

Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Turkey

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Lawrence Cannon (Minister of Foreign Affairs, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, with leave of the House and pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I would like to table, in both official languages, the Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Turkey for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income and on Capital, signed in Ottawa on July 14, 2009.

* * *

[English]

Economic Recovery Act (stimulus)

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Jim Flaherty (Minister of Finance, CPC)

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-51, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on January 27, 2009 and to implement other measures.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

* * *

Parliament of Canada Act

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP)

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-446, An Act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act (members who cross the floor).

He said: Mr. Speaker, three years ago, in Vancouver Kingsway, a member of Parliament was elected as a Liberal and crossed the floor to sit as a Conservative two weeks after that election.

Our citizens were outraged. They regarded this as an act of democratic betrayal. It rendered their votes meaningless. People from every political persuasion joined together to demand the restoration of their democratic rights. People like Mike Watkins, Jurgen Claudepierre and Shannon Steele worked tirelessly for this noble goal.

I am honoured to rise today to introduce a piece of legislation that serves to restore respect for democracy in our country.

This bill would require any member who crosses the floor to resign and run in a byelection. It would put the actions of a floor-crossing member to the test of the will of the voters of his or her constituency, where it properly belongs. In a time when voters are increasingly cynical, I believe this would go some way towards restoring confidence in our political system.

I hope that all members of this House put their partisan interests aside and support this law. It is good for our democracy. It is good for our country.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

* * *

Department of Peace Act

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Bill Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP)

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-447, An Act to establish the Department of Peace.

He said: Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to table a private member's bill today that calls for the establishment of a department of peace as a full federal government department.

I would like to thank the member for Scarborough—Agincourt for seconding the bill.

The bill is based on the model developed by the Canadian department of peace initiative. This bill would establish a full, comprehensive department of peace as part of the infrastructure of the Canadian government, with its own minister, department and resources, and put peace at the centre of government rather than on the corner of a desk of another minister or other public servants.

There would be a voice dedicated to the promotion of peace at the cabinet table.

The department's mandate would be to promote a culture of peace and the non-violent resolution of conflict in Canada and around the world and to build institutions for long-term research policy and action for sustainable peace.

The bill would also establish a Canadian civilian peace service to further professionalize peace work by Canadians.

A similar youth peace service is also contemplated by the bill.

As the co-chairs of the Canadian department of peace initiative, Bill Bhaneja and Saul Arbess have noted that this bill is about the need to bring peace through peaceful means.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

* * *

Canada Labour Code

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP)

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-448, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (minimum wage).

She said: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table my private member's bill, which is an act to amend the Canada Labour Code with regard to the minimum wage. It seeks to ensure that an employer shall pay to each employee a wage that is not less than $12 per hour.

At a time when the cost of food, medication and home heating is increasing at an alarming rate, it is essential that all those governed by the Canada Labour Code have wages that can feed a family.

With the impending 8% increase to B.C. and Ontario families caused by the Liberal-Conservative HST scheme, families need a living wage.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

* * *

(1520)

[Translation]

Free Public Transit for Seniors Act

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Marcel Proulx (Hull—Aylmer, Lib.)

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-449, An Act regarding free public transit for seniors.

He said: Mr. Speaker, today I am tabling a bill that would help seniors across Canada break free from their isolation. We know it is good to encourage seniors to live active social lives, and for them to break out of the isolation they may experience. We also know that it is difficult for many seniors in Canada to get around, and often public transportation is their only option.

I am tabling a bill to allow the Minister of Finance to make direct payments to a fund established to help the provinces, territories and municipalities offer seniors across Canada free local public transportation, outside peak hours.

I am calling on all the members of the House to support this bill and to ensure it is passed as quickly as possible.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

* * *

[English]

Canada Post Corporation Act

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Larry Miller (Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, CPC)

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-450, An Act to amend the Canada Post Corporation Act (rural mail delivery).

He said: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to introduce this private member's bill. As everyone in the House knows, a current review of rural mailboxes across the country is going on because of a court order. As a result, a number of mailboxes in rural communities have had to be moved, some at great expense.

For example, I have a senior lady, in her 80s, in my riding who was asked to move her mailbox. She neither had the ability to do it herself nor to hire someone. This bill would simply change the act so that when a mailbox is ordered moved under the Canada Post Corporation Act it would cover the cost.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

* * *

Petitions

Canadian Neutron Centre

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions. The first states that the Canadian Institute for Neutron Scattering has released a plan to build the Canadian Neutron Centre. They are calling upon Parliament to implement the plan for a national laboratory at Chalk River to replace the NRU.

* * *

Firearms Registry

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, the second petition calls upon Parliament to end the wasteful long gun registry and asks parliamentarians to vote in support of Bill C-391.

* * *

Animal Transportation Regulations

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Michelle Simson (Scarborough Southwest, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure to present two petitions today. The first is signed by a number of constituents of Scarborough Southwest and across Ontario. They are calling upon the House of Commons to strengthen the animal transportation regulations under the Health of Animals Act to be consistent with the findings of the EU's scientific committee on animals.

* * *

(1525)

Canada Post

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Michelle Simson (Scarborough Southwest, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is signed by constituents of Scarborough Southwest who are calling on the Government of Canada to maintain the moratorium on post office closures and withdraw the legislation to legalize remailers. The petitioners are also calling upon the government to instruct Canada Post to maintain, expand and improve postal services.

* * *

Harmonized Sales Tax

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition from constituents in British Columbia regarding the HST. The petitioners point out that taking money from the pockets of hard-working families makes no sense in these difficult economic times and it represents an unfair tax shift from corporations onto consumers.

They note that, from restaurants to realtors, small businesses in Vancouver will be hurt and consumers will pay more on everything from haircuts to vitamins. Further, they note it was a product of political deception in the last B.C. election by the provincial Liberals. Although they are aware that the HST is supported by both federal Conservatives and Liberals, they urge the government to change its mind and withdraw its support for the British Columbia HST.

* * *

Firearms Registry

[Table of Contents]

Mr. David Tilson (Dufferin—Caledon, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions to present to the House. The first is signed by citizens of my riding of Dufferin—Caledon asking that all members support Bill C-391, which would ban the ineffective and costly long gun registry program.

* * *

Horse Slaughter

[Table of Contents]

Mr. David Tilson (Dufferin—Caledon, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is from citizens from across Canada asking the members of the House to ban the slaughter of horses in Canada for human consumption and the export of horses for the same purpose.

* * *

Burns Bog

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Sukh Dhaliwal (Newton—North Delta, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, Burns Bog in my riding of Newton—North Delta is often referred to as the lungs for the Lower Mainland.

Last weekend hundreds of people gathered to support its cause by participating in the Jog for the Bog. Over the summer the Burns Bog Conservation Society and members of my community created this petition to support the Burns Bog.

I am honoured to present this petition on behalf of my constituents from Newton—North Delta.

It asks that the government initiate the process outlined by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization to establish Burns Bog in Delta, British Columbia as a World Heritage site in recognition of it being a cultural and environmental landmark. We believe this would go a long way to preserving the bog for generations to come.

* * *

Duchess of Kent Legion

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, I have three petitions today.

The first is on behalf of the Duchess of Kent Legion, branch 263, which has fallen into financial difficulty with the Canada Revenue Agency due to the theft of the GST fund by a former employee. While that employee was charged and convicted of the crime, the stolen monies were never recovered.

The Duchess of Kent Legion has a debt of more than $275,000, and despite paying thousands on this debt, the accruing interest is driving the legion deeper into debt every month.

The Minister of National Revenue has the authority under section 23(2) of the Financial Administration Act to forgive the interest.

The petitioners ask that the Parliament of Canada direct the Minister of National Revenue to exercise his authority and forgive the interest debt. We owe it to our veterans who served our country with honour and courage to save their legion.

* * *

(1530)

Pay Equity

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP):

My second petition, Mr. Speaker, asks that the Government of Canada reinstate federal pay equity. Equal pay for work of equal value has still not been achieved in Canada.

The Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act is an attack on pay equity. It is the antithesis of the recommendations made by the 2004 pay equity task force and it removes pay equity protection under the Canadian Human Rights Act for public sector employees.

The petitioners call upon the Parliament of Canada to implement all the recommendations of the 2004 pay equity task force, ensure pay equity protection under the Canadian Human Rights Act and scrap the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act.

* * *

South Yemen

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP):

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I have a petition from petitioners who are very concerned about events in south Yemen. They ask the Government of Canada to immediately take action with the international community to end atrocities in south Yemen.

The real risk and implications of the current situation there are so grave that such a situation, without a doubt, would profoundly affect the security and stability of the region and endanger the interests of many countries, including Canada.

The petitioners ask that the House of Commons tell the Canadian government to take action to prevent an imminent crime against humanity by coordinating efforts with other friends and allies to send a fact-finding mission to south Yemen to ask the president to refrain from any escalation of violence, release all detainees and fulfill his obligations under UN Security Council resolutions 924-94 and 931-94 to resume dialogue with the legitimate and recognized representatives of the people of south Yemen.

* * *

Canadian International Development Agency

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Brad Trost (Saskatoon—Humboldt, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I have the privilege to present a petition from people, predominantly from southern Ontario, calling upon the Government of Canada to stop all funding to Planned Parenthood by CIDA.

* * *

Fuel Prices

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Dan McTeague (Pickering—Scarborough East, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition that is signed by Canadians from across this country, ranging from Dawson, Yukon, all the way to British Columbia, back to Kamloops and over to Richmond Hill.

The petitioners call upon the government to acknowledge that the high price of fuel is damaging the Canadian economy, on a day when gas prices are probably going to go up 2¢ to 3¢ a litre; reinstate the office of petroleum price information, which was abolished by the government in 2006; begin hearings into the energy sector to determine how the government can foster competition and provide transparency in the energy market; and eliminate the monopolistic efficiency defence cost to the competition of Canada.

The petition has been signed by over 103 Canadians.

* * *

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

[Table of Contents]

Mr. John Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, I have three petitions to present today.

The first petition concerns the CBC. The petitioners would like the Government of Canada to understand that CBC programming is an essential service in northwestern Ontario and to ensure that the quality of local programming remains and that jobs are not lost in northwestern Ontario.

* * *

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement

[Table of Contents]

Mr. John Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions to present signed by petitioners who are concerned about the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement.

The petitioners call on Parliament to reject the agreement at least until an independent human rights impact assessment and some other measures are carried out.

* * *

Suicide

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Harold Albrecht (Kitchener—Conestoga, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour today to present a petition from about 400 people from Alberta, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick and Ontario.

The petitioners are calling on the government to enable prosecution of those who encourage or counsel someone to commit suicide, and to update the Criminal Code to reflect the new realities of 21st century broadband access.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Ed Holder (London West, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present three petitions from Canadians right across the country, including individuals in Quebec.

The petitioners call on Parliament to pass legislation to enable the prosecution of those who encourage or counsel someone to commit suicide and to upgrade the Criminal Code to reflect the new realities of the 21st century broadband access.

* * *

Budget Implementation Act

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition today calling for a stop to the wage rollbacks and a restoration of pay equity for public service workers.

The budget implementation bill empowers the government to roll back negotiated wages and arbitration awards retroactively and to radically change the rules governing pay equity in the federal public sector.

The petitioners call on the Government of Canada to support Motion No. 384 presented by the member for Burnaby—New Westminster and to rescind the provisions of Bill C-10 that violate workers' rights to collective bargaining, including the right to arbitration awards and the right to have equal pay for work of equal value.

* * *

Human Trafficking

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Dona Cadman (Surrey North, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the member for Kildonan—St. Paul, I would like to present petitions from many communities across Canada.

The petitioners call on parliamentarians to support Bill C-268. The bill will be voted on tonight, and Canada's citizens are counting on parliamentarians to support it.

* * *

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, if Question No. 231 could be made an order for return, the return would be tabled immediately.

The Speaker: Is that agreed?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

[Text]

Question No. 231--Mr. Nathan Cullen:

What is the total amount of government funding, since fiscal year 2004-2005 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, listing each department of agency, initiative and amount?

(Return tabled)

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Tom Lukiwski:

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

The Speaker: Is that agreed?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

* * *

(1535)

Motions for Papers

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I would ask you to be so kind as to call Notice of Motion for the Production of Papers No. P-5 in the name of the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.

Motion No. P-5

That a humble Address be presented to Her Excellency praying that she will cause to be laid before the House a copy of all contracts between Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and Hill and Knowlton between September 1, 2007 and February 25, 2009.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Tom Lukiwski:

Mr. Speaker, Notice of Motion for the Production of Papers No. P-5 is acceptable to the government subject to the usual reservations concerning confidential information, and the documents are tabled immediately.

(Motion agreed to)

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Tom Lukiwski:

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the other notices of motion for the production of papers be allowed to stand.

The Speaker: Is that agreed?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

Government Orders

[Government Orders]

* * *

[English]

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act

The House resumed from September 29 consideration of the motion that Bill C-23, An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Colombia, the Agreement on the Environment between Canada and the Republic of Colombia and the Agreement on Labour Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Colombia, be read the second time and referred to a committee, of the amendment and of the amendment to the amendment.

[Table of Contents]

The Speaker:

When the matter was last before the House, the hon. member for Vancouver East had the floor. Three minutes are remaining in the time allotted for her remarks, and I therefore call upon the hon. member for Vancouver East.

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Libby Davies (Vancouver East, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, I intend to use my full three minutes.

I want to talk a bit more about the crisis situation in Colombia as we debate this bill.

I find it rather concerning that the Liberal member for Kings—Hants, during this debate, said that the NDP was hallucinating about the situation in Colombia. That is really a bit over the top, because when one looks at the real facts of what is going on, the reality in Colombia for workers, it is terribly serious. People are receiving death threats. Workers are being murdered.

I want to read into the record some information from the International Centre for Trade Union Rights, the Colombia bulletin, from January to September 2009. In that report they assess, as a result of their information and investigations, that there has been a total of 27 trade unionists assassinated in Colombia between January and September of this year alone. This is not a hallucination. This is a very dire situation that is facing workers in this country.

I just wanted to read out a couple of the citations in this report.

On May 5, the president of the Santander public sector workers' union received death threats that were sent to the union office by letter.

On May 28, a letter was sent to the offices of Atlántico containing death threats against a whole number of union leaders, including those from the health workers' union, the teachers' union, the court staff and judicial workers' union, the university workers' union and the pensioners' union. The list also included a death threat against a human rights lawyer. This letter was signed by paramilitary groups.

One of the grave concerns that we have about this bill is that it will do nothing to improve the atrocious violations of human rights and labour rights in Colombia. This is something we are very concerned about and the reason we are opposing this bill and trying to stop this bill from going through Parliament.

We think there is very broad support right across the country to do this, and I want to congratulate the activists in the CLC, in local labour councils across the country, as well as those in civil society. People have really taken this issue on, and they are really making the connections between what happens to us as Canadians and what happens to our brothers and sisters, whether they are in Colombia or elsewhere.

We talk about living in a global village. These trade agreements are written in the far distance with no involvement from ordinary people. In some ways it is like signing one's life away and that is how we see this trade agreement.

I do want to say that because of the work by civil society and the labour movement, and particularly by our own trade critic, the member for Burnaby—New Westminster, we aim to stop this bill. So far it is going pretty well and we are going to keep at it.

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.):

Madam Speaker, the hon. member claims that paramilitary groups have murdered trade unionists this year. She should be aware that paramilitary groups have been disbanded in Colombia, but there are drug gangsters who continue to exist. There continues to be a battle between FARC, the leftist guerrillas who philosophically are closer to her party, and the drug lords who continue to operate in what has become not an ideological war today but a drug war.

To say that paramilitary forces are murdering union leaders today is false, because everybody who has been studying the issue recognizes that the paramilitary forces have been disbanded, and in fact the trend line on these attacks has decreased tremendously. The fact is that there is a drug war in Colombia and the best way to provide an alternative to the narco-economy is through legitimate trade.

She also has said, and the trade critic for the party has claimed, that President Obama is against it. In fact President Obama has said that he supports the free trade agreement and has instructed Ambassador Kirk, his trade representative, to work closely with President Uribe's team to proceed with the free trade agreement, so the U.S. Democrat position is in support--

(1540)

[Table of Contents]

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Denise Savoie):

I would like to give the member for Vancouver East the opportunity to respond.

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Libby Davies:

Madam Speaker, I am glad the member for Kings—Hants got up and I know he would like us to believe that everything is okay in Colombia--

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Scott Brison:

No, that's not true.

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Libby Davies:

--and that somehow this trade agreement is going to make things better. I know he would like to downplay the situation, but the fact is, what I just read comes from the International Centre for Trade Union Rights. It is their latest report, the Colombia bulletin--

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Scott Brison:

You are a big supporter of free trade.

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Libby Davies:

--that contains information right up until September 2009, so this is very recent information. I only read a very small part because I only had three minutes left to speak, but I would be happy to share with the member the information that is contained here, and then I think he will begin to appreciate that the source material that is here tells us about the dire situation, violence, death threats and murders that have actually taken place.

[Table of Contents]

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Denise Savoie):

I would like to call the hon. member for Kings Hants to order.

I will not recognize those who continue to heckle. Questions and comments.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP):

Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate the member for a terrific speech on the subject.

I want to point out, as many other members have, that just last year the House of Commons Standing Committee on International Trade recommended that no agreement be signed with Colombia until the human rights situation there is improved. It also recommended that a human rights impact assessment study be undertaken to determine the real impact of a trade agreement.

Now the question is, why has the government completely ignored this report and why are the Liberals going along with this?

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Libby Davies:

Madam Speaker, that is a very good question.

We have pointed out over and over again that not only is this a bad trade deal, but the process by which it is being taken through this Parliament has also been seriously flawed. I know that our member on the trade committee and other members of the NDP caucus have fought tooth and nail to try to ensure there is a proper public consultation process and assessment, just as the member for Elmwood—Transcona has outlined.

The only response I can give is that we have a Conservative government that, like the Liberal government before it, is more interested in creating these trade deals and signing on the dotted line than it is with the real impact on the lives of ordinary people in some of these countries, including the impact on Canadian workers.

I think it is because it is so divorced from the reality of what it is that workers face as a result of these trade agreements, particularly in the situation in Colombia. The government has no regard for what those real impacts are.

This happens at a very high level, and I think it is very reflective of the problem with these trade agreements and how they come about. They do not involve trade unions and they do not involve civil society. We are not a party to these things and yet we live with the consequences of them. Some of them, as we have pointed out, are hugely negative and problematic.

We will always try to work to ensure that there is a proper process, at least through our Parliament. If the Conservative government and the Liberal members choose to ignore that, I guess that is their problem. We will always seek to ensure that there is that kind of wide consultation and examination of these agreements.

(1545)

[Translation]

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Luc Desnoyers (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, BQ):

Madam Speaker, I would like to focus on the current social, human and political situation in Colombia, so as to explain why the Bloc Québécois opposes Bill C-23, Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act.

It is important to consider the impact and repercussions that the terms of this agreement will have on the people of Colombia. We must ensure that the rights of Colombians are respected and that their opinions will be taken into account before we ratify such an agreement.

Civil society and the people of Colombia are opposed to a free trade agreement that enhances the rights of foreign investors and exporters, but does nothing to take into account local issues in terms of development and human rights.

Yes, trade can support development and the realization of human rights, if it brings benefits to vulnerable populations and allows those states that are willing to do so to promote development and protect the environment.

The uproar against this free trade agreement between Canada and Colombia is only growing in strength, in Canada and in Colombia. According to the Canadian Council for International Cooperation, the Canadian Association of Labour Lawyers, the Canadian Labour Congress and the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement and the two side agreements—one on labour rights and the other on the environment—will only exacerbate the problem of human rights violations, and the legislative provisions meant to guarantee those rights and protect the environment will not work.

We cannot enter into a free trade agreement with Colombia without looking at the human rights situation in that country. Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone has the right to life, security of the person, freedom of expression and freedom of association. It is therefore incomprehensible that the Canadian government should ratify a free trade agreement given the Colombian government's deplorable record of violating human and workers' rights.

Can the Canadian people, who consider themselves a democratic society and stand up for workers' rights, sanction a free trade agreement with a country where people put their lives at risk just by demonstrating or wanting to join a union? It is regrettable that the Canadian government is supporting a regime that is heavily involved in human rights violations and mired in a huge political scandal because of its ties to paramilitary groups.

Those responsible for the crimes against union members and civilians are very seldom found guilty in court. Only 3% of the crimes committed have led to a conviction and in the meantime, the paramilitaries are reasserting control over the territory, and the government is doing nothing to stop them.

In Colombia, it is easier to organize an armed paramilitary group than a union. The anti-union culture prevailing in Colombia makes it one of the most dangerous countries in the world for union members. A number of groups are targeted. The Liberal member who said that everything is great in Colombia must be hallucinating because when we examine what is happening we see that major groups such as teachers, those involved in labour disputes, those against privatization, women, children, prison guards and farmers are being targeted. Furthermore, thousands of people are being displaced.

I would like to cite just a few statistics: 2,685 union members have been killed in recent years, 474 of them since President Uribe came to power. Thousands of men, women and children have been threatened and even kidnapped. In 2008, 41 union members were killed and in 2009, 29 were murdered, as mentioned by the NDP member. More than 300,000 people were displaced in 2007 and more than 380,000 in 2008. That is unacceptable. Such displacement occurs more frequently in rural areas.

(1550)

These people are being displaced with the support of mining companies and large agricultural companies, making this a major humanitarian issue, bigger than what is going on in Sudan. That says something.

Why is Canada, and especially a government like this one, acting like this? The Prime Minister has said:

I will sign trade agreements with parties who respect the rights we respect in Canada; fundamental values like democracy, human rights, the rule of law and good governance.

How can the Prime Minister and the current government sign, or try to sign, an agreement with Colombia?

Earlier, we spoke about paramilitary groups, and I said that it was easier to form this kind of group than to form a union. It is true that they are now called something else. We call them militias, the Black Eagles. They go by many names, but they continue to systematically kill unionists and/or civilians who speak out against the Uribe government, which is also trying to finally sign this free trade agreement that only gives rights to investors and has nothing to do with trade.

Bill C-23 contains a chapter on investments. As the agreement contains a chapter on investment protection, it will make life easier for Canadians investing in Colombia, especially in mining.

Judging by all the investment protection agreements Canada has signed over the years, the one that would bind Canada and Colombia is ill conceived. All these agreements contain clauses that enable foreign investors to sue the local government if it takes measures that reduce the return on their investment. Such clauses are especially dangerous in a country where labour and environmental protection laws are uncertain at best. By protecting a Canadian investor against any improvement in living conditions in Colombia, such an agreement could delay social and environmental progress in that country, where the need for progress is great.

Canadian mining companies have to be careful not to become complicit in human rights violations or cause forced displacement of any populations, since regions that are rich in minerals tend to become theatres of violence, paramilitary control and displacements.

This chapter pays mere lip service to corporate social responsibility. Its “best efforts” provisions are purely voluntary and completely unenforceable.

As mentioned earlier, a parliamentary group studied the issue and submitted a report that was completely ignored by the current government. We made some important recommendations in that report.

As members of the Bloc Québécois, we cannot condone such stubbornness and such disdain for parliamentarians. Such behaviour stems from an authoritarian trend that is completely unacceptable and cannot become a precedent. This is not how we would like democratic institutions to operate in the future.

[Table of Contents]

M. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NPD):

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member on his speech. We just heard the Liberal Party critic say that there are no longer any paramilitary groups in Colombia. He dismisses all of the evidence presented by the member and ignores the humanitarian and human rights groups that say exactly the opposite, that Colombian paramilitary groups are still killing people.

I would like the member to comment on that. Does he think that the Liberal Party's position is even remotely credible when it claims that paramilitary groups no longer exist in Colombia?

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Luc Desnoyers:

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague. Earlier, I said that the Liberal member was hallucinating. Parliamentarians are not the only ones talking about these paramilitary groups. A number of civil society groups in Canada, Quebec and Colombia are still condemning paramilitary activities in Colombia.

As I said earlier, paramilitary groups are no longer known by that name. Instead, some such militias are now known as the Black Eagles. The Colombian army, which I now consider to be a paramilitary group, has been told to make sure that Mr. Uribe can pursue this kind of trade agreement with Canada in a way that prevents the Colombian people from benefiting from it.

(1555)

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Christian Ouellet (Brome—Missisquoi, BQ):

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by congratulating my colleague from Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, who gave an exceptional speech about why we will be voting against this truly bad agreement.

I would like to talk about some of the examples he gave. He emphasized that this agreement is quite hypocritical. The Conservative government says that this agreement is about trading goods, but we know that it is mainly about investment, particularly in the mining sector, and about protecting Canadian investors.

I know that my colleague was a unionist and that he has had personal experience with a similar situation in Quebec, not unlike what is going on in Colombia. Iron ore was being mined and Quebec was getting 1¢ per tonne. Workers were being paid starvation wages. Foreign investors were the ones making money.

Can my colleague tell us whether such conditions in the Quebec mining industry improved workers' quality of life, their health and the environment?

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Luc Desnoyers:

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question.

We could draw a parallel between what happened here in Canada and what could happen in Colombia if we were to apply this kind of agreement to investors. Indeed, there was a time when workers here in the mining industry were terribly exploited. That was the genesis of unions, which helped secure decent working conditions in our mines.

Right now in Colombia, it would be impossible to ensure similar improvements to the working conditions, because the people are not allowed to unionize or to negotiate. Workers who choose to oppose something are systematically excluded from working, or even worse, killed instantly in some cases, especially when it comes to labour activists. I am not afraid to say that this practice is still a common occurrence in Colombia.

These are things that we denounce here at home, although the situations we face are much less severe. It is completely unacceptable that a government like the one across from me in this House would dare ratify this kind of agreement.

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Judy Foote (Random—Burin—St. George's, Lib.):

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-23, the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement implementation act. I have followed this debate with great interest and have listened to the arguments being made for and against.

Given my own personal experience with Colombians and having spent time in Colombia, I can appreciate on some level what is being said by those with one point of view and on the other level, I am inclined to want to fill them in on my understanding of what has gone on in Colombia over the years.

There is no doubt that this debate is about people. It is about ensuring that people have a right to live the kind of life that we live comfortably, and that they have the same rights and freedoms that we enjoy. That has been a problem in years past. That was a problem when I spent time in Colombia working with street children. There were times when young boys would be taken and destroyed. Young street boys were destroyed by the paramilitary and police because they were considered a nuisance.

However, we were there. I was working with a not for profit group and we were there to show that it did not have to be this way. It did not have to be that way then and it does not have to be that way now. I know from what I have read and people I have spoken with that progress has been made in Colombia. We will continue to make progress if we lead by example.

That is what my remarks are going to be about today. Countries like Canada have an obligation to make the point that we can lead by example. Look at what we are doing. Let us enter into business arrangements and whatever arrangements we have to enter into, so that people will understand that this is not the right way to do it. We do not take people for granted. We do not treat people with disrespect. We do not hold people up and tell them that they are no good because they cannot do this or that or make a contribution.

We as Canadians must show them that that is not the way to go. When I listen to colleagues talk about trade unionists being murdered, that is serious. The colleague who just spoke referenced information that she read suggesting that a great number more trade unionists are being murdered. That is not the same information that we have. We would not stand here supporting anything that would be detrimental to the people of Colombia.

I stand here today because I believe that we can make a difference. We can show people that the way to live is to work together and share our values with people who want to make a change in the world, and understand that we can work together to make that difference.

The people of Colombia need to feel confident. They need to know that there are people out there who care and want to help them make a difference. How do we do that? Again, we lead by example. If that means entering into business with Colombia business people, then we do that. Through building relationships and working together, we can lead by example. By building these relationships, one builds trust. When one builds trust, people come to understand that they can in fact depend on them.

I think it is really important to go down this path. I think it is important for a group of people that I spent a considerable amount of time with. I referenced street children earlier. Street children are children who were members of a family, particularly in rural parts of Colombia. Their fathers had to leave home through no choice of their own. They left a family behind. In some cases, they left 10 children behind for a mother to raise. The fathers did not leave because they wanted to leave. They left because there were no legitimate employment opportunities for them.

This is where the drug lords enter the picture. Drug lords are providing employment. The fathers never returned to the home because they knew that in doing so they would probably be putting their families at risk. They continued to work in an environment that was less than safe for them and one that they felt was probably even worse for their families should they return home because their families could be held to ransom.

(1600)

We have families living without a father. We have mothers trying to raise as many as 10 children. What happened? The mother could not do it. It was just impossible to do. The young boys in the family, many of whom were not even teenagers, left home to form street gangs, and they became a member of a family. That family was the street gang. As members of that street gang, they did whatever they had to do to survive. In doing so, that was when the paramilitaries and the police and whoever else was in authority considered them to be a nuisance and more often than not got rid of them.

We need to be there. We need to do whatever we can to help those children. When I talk about not for profit organizations, they are doing tremendous work in these countries, but we cannot leave it up to the not for profit organizations. It is not fair to do that. They only have limited resources, and there is no way that they can possibly do everything that needs to be done.

All of this is to make the point that entering into economic arrangements is not only good for Canadians but it is good for Colombians. I know that, as a Canadian, I want to do whatever is good in an economic free trade agreement that is going to be good for the people I represent and for the people in our country. We do that by seeking out opportunities around the world. This is one such opportunity.

I know it works. As a previous minister of industry, I led trade missions to different countries. In fact, I could list many companies that have entered into successful business arrangements with companies around the world.

One example is Rutter Technologies in St. John's, Newfoundland, which is doing business in Asia, the Middle East, Europe, Africa, Australia, New Zealand, South America and North America. By doing that it is providing employment opportunities not only for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador but for people in other countries.

The same will happen in Colombia. There will be those opportunities that will come that will be legitimate opportunities for the men and women of Colombia. We have a part to play. We can help to make a difference in this country and I think we need to do that. I think we have an obligation to do that.

What we have seen happening in Colombia in the last while is a good news story. Last year we saw two-way merchandise trade between Canada and Colombia that amounted to approximately $1.3 billion. Canada exports $703 million worth of goods to Colombia in motor vehicles, manufactured goods, wheat and paper, and imports $644 million worth of goods from Colombia in coffee, bananas, coal, oil, sugar and flowers.

It is a two-way opportunity and there are benefits for both countries. That is what we need to recognize. By doing that, by entering into these kinds of arrangements, we do provide those legitimate working opportunities for Colombians.

What is just as important to me as the free trade agreement itself is the side agreement on labour co-operation. There is also one on the environment. This side agreement with an economic arrangement cannot be overlooked. As with Canada's free trade agreements with Chile, Costa Rica and NAFTA, the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement includes side agreements on labour co-operation and the environment.

The Canada-Colombia labour co-operation agreement recognizes that both countries have obligations under the 1998 international labour organization declaration and fundamental principles and rights at work, which requires each country to ensure that its domestic laws, regulations and practices protect the following rights: the right to freedom of association, the right to collective bargaining, the abolition of child labour, the elimination of forced or compulsory labour, and the elimination of discrimination.

This is an incredible, important part of this particular free trade agreement.

(1605)

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Jason Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, CPC):

Madam Speaker, I want to briefly commend my hon. colleague for her very articulate remarks. I had not heard her speak before in the House. I think we could all benefit from her more active participation in future debates. Her intervention struck me as balanced and based on personal experience.

Just very briefly, I think members of all parties say that we need to expand our trade markets so that we are less reliant on the United States. We certainly hear that from our friends in the New Democratic Party. However, at the same time, we often hear from those voices advocating an expansion in trade, opposition to particular trade agreements.

I wonder if she would care to reflect on the fact that there does appear to be a consensus that we need to expand our trade markets so there is less reliance on the United States, but in order to do so, we actually need to establish better trade arrangements with particular nations, such as Colombia.

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Judy Foote:

Madam Speaker, if we are going to play the role that we should play as a country in this world, and we are talking about a global marketplace here. If we are going to make a difference, if we are going to be the country that we are known as, a country that cares, then the obligation is on us to reach out to other countries throughout the world, no matter where they are, and work these arrangements so that they are in the best interests of both countries.

I think we can all speak about atrocities that are happening throughout the world. Do we just ignore them or do we take measures that are going to improve the situation and put an end to them? I think that is our obligation. There are wonderful opportunities throughout this country, working in a global marketplace, to see a benefit for all involved.

(1610)

[Translation]

[Table of Contents]

Ms. France Bonsant (Compton—Stanstead, BQ):

Madam Speaker, I listened as the member talked about Colombia, and I have a brief question for her.

Does she believe that that country's labour laws are up to International Labour Organization standards?

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Judy Foote:

Madam Speaker, we have seen great strides made in Colombia in the last while. If we look at the last 10 years particularly, we have seen significant strides made. The leadership in Colombia is working very hard to make a difference. It is working very hard to change the actions of the past. I think we have to recognize that. It will not happen overnight. However, with input from countries like Canada, leading by example, we will see the kind of Colombia and the kind of working environment in place that the people of that country are entitled to.

[Translation]

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Christian Ouellet (Brome—Missisquoi, BQ):

Madam Speaker, does my Liberal colleague believe that having a free trade agreement will increase exports?

She has already given bananas and flowers as examples. Flowers have killed just about the entire market for flowers grown in Ontario and Quebec greenhouses. Tariffs are already so low that I do not see how trade could increase.

I have the feeling my colleague did not realize that what this agreement primarily does is make it easier for Canadians to invest in the mining sector.

Why did my colleague not talk about that and tell us what the agreement is really all about?

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Ms. Judy Foote:

Madam Speaker, to just identify flowers as one commodity being traded is really doing an injustice. We should look at the many other examples of things that are being traded, whether it is coal, flowers or bananas. We have to look at the total number of products that are being traded and then work from there. Obviously, we have to start somewhere. We are making great strides. Both countries are benefiting from what we have in place now. So, let us make more opportunities for both countries and I think we will see a difference.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP):

Madam Speaker, I was hoping the member for Kings—Hants would stick around and listen because some of his remarks stirred me today. It motivated me to ask for a speaking opportunity in the context of this debate about the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement.

I am a socialist and a trade unionist and as such, if I lived in Colombia I would probably be dead today. I would not be alive at all. I would have been whacked by paramilitary hit squads associated with the ruling party, the government of the day.

I used to do my job in an aggressive way to elevate the standards of wages and working conditions of the people that I represented. What happens to people in Colombia who have reputations for trying to interfere with the absolute rule of the corporate structure is that they get killed.

Trade with Canada is not a right. Trade with Canada should be a privilege granted to those who are worthy of such an esteemed position in the international trading community. If it is one of our goals to elevate the standards of wages and living conditions for workers around the world, that is a laudable notion, but in this we are putting the cart before the horse, because once the Uribe government gets this free trade gift signed, the incentive to improve the well-documented human rights abuses will be gone. They will have vanished because there goes the only lever to try to elevate its performance on the international world stage.

I have very little time to make this case but a dear friend of mine, the former head of the Manitoba Federation of Labour who became the secretary treasurer of the Canadian Labour Congress, Brother Dick Martin, the head of the Steelworkers Union local 6166 in Thompson, became the head of ORIT, which is the labour central organization under the Organization of American States representing members of the OAS. Canada is a member of the Organization of American States, as is Colombia, Peru and much of Central and South America.

Dick Martin spent a lot of time in Colombia and, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, came back to report horrific assassinations of people he knew and worked with. People he would be meeting with one day would be killed in their driveway or home that night for having the temerity to speak out for fair wages and working conditions for the people they represented. It was the wholesale slaughter of trade unionists and it continues to this day.

The reason I raise this is that we are not talking about something that happened in the late 1980s and early 1990s as a result of the drug war or the power struggle that was going on in that country. We are talking about a report from the International Center for Trade Union Rights, Colombia Bulletin, January to September 2009. In that period between February and June, 27 trade unionists were assassinated in Colombia.

Acts of violence against trade unions were continued at an alarming rate. I have dozens of examples. On June 9, Pablo Rodriguez Garavito, a teacher and member of the teachers union, was assassinated by unknown gunmen in his classroom in the town of Puerto Rondon. It was in his classroom in front of his students because he was a trade union activist.

Colombia is a country that is unworthy of trade with Canada because once this agreement is signed it will dine out on the fact that its country is okay because a nice country like Canada saw fit to join with it.

My question would be: Why Colombia? It is not even the biggest trading partner of that region. It is the fifth largest trading partner with Canada in that particular area of South America. However, there is this compulsion to rush into this free trade agreement without consultation and without adequate thought going into it to maximize any benefit that we could gain from it.

I want to quote the chairman of the House trade working group in the United States, Chairman Mike Michaud from the state of Maine. He said:

If [I] had been born in Colombia, [I] would be dead. That's right. As members of our respective labor unions, the fight for higher wages, better working conditions, and a secure pension could have cost [me my life].

That is an American congressman, the chair of a House trade working group.

(1615)

What about Colombian senator, Jorge Robledo, who said, “You can be sure of the fact that should this free trade agreement be ratified, Canada will become extremely unpopular and disliked by the people of Colombia”. This is a Colombian politician sounding the alarm that this agreement does not have any kind of unanimous support among the people of Colombia and certainly is unworthy of the support of the House.

I want to take a moment to recognize and pay tribute to the diligent work of my colleague, the member for Burnaby—New Westminster, who has been working with a large group of civil society in Canada, trade unions, lawyers, environmental groups, parliamentarians and members of the Colombian congress. My colleague has been in contact and has met with members of the Colombian congress who are opposed to this agreement and concerned citizens all around the world to raise awareness and to stop this agreement. I do not think anyone has worked as hard to sound the alarm that this agreement is unworthy of our support and it should not be ratified by the House of Commons. The bill should not pass.

I also want to challenge some of the claims made by my colleague from Kings—Hants who, as I said, I was hoping would stay and listen to the remarks I have to make because I do not know where he gets his information from. I know he travelled to Colombia and met with people who support this agreement but he claimed that he met with a significant number of trade union groups which supported it. I have a declaration here signed by the general secretary of the General Labour Confederation, which would be Colombia's equivalent of our Canadian Labour Congress; the president of the Confederation of Colombian Workers, another trade union central umbrella organization; and the president of the Unified Central of Labour Unions, the CUT. It is too long to read, but I will perhaps read the last paragraph. These three leading trade union leaders, who represent the bulk of the unionized workers in that country, say:

That under these conditions...

Which they cited in great detail,

...the Colombian labour movement invites the Canadian society as a whole, and its Parliament, to demonstrate its solidarity with the Colombian people in mobilizing against and abstaining from signing...[the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement]...

... like those signed with the U.S., the European Free trade Association (EFTA) and the one it intends to sign with the European Union, because these will only aggravate the already difficult situation of a country that does not deserve the situation it is currently facing.

They make a compelling argument that by engaging in this free trade agreement we will be compounding the problems that they face and we will be making it that much more difficult for the working people in that country to elevate the standard of wages and working conditions under which they toil, and that human rights, as such, will continue to be violated on a monumental scale in the state of Colombia without the global pressure that would come from our holding back on this liberalized trade agreement.

Time does not permit going through many of the details here, but the United Kingdom recently ended military aid to Colombia because of the systematic crimes committed against the Colombian people by the Colombian military. The connection has been made that the Colombian government of President Uribe has been accused by international human rights organizations of corruption, electoral fraud, complicity in extrajudicial killings by the army, links to paramilitary and right-wing death squads and using its security forces to spy on the supreme court, opposition politicians and journalists. In fact, many government members, including ministers and members of Uribe's own family, have been forced to resign or have been arrested.

The Colombian government is a corrupt regime unworthy of a free trade agreement with Canada. We should be far more particular with which country we trade. It should be a reward. It should be a recognition that we have stipulated ourselves to certain guidelines that are befitting of democracies in the 21st century such as adherence to human rights, labour rights and environmental conditions within these free trade agreements, not as some auxiliary side agreement that has no enforcement mechanism.

(1620)

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Jason Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, CPC):

Madam Speaker, I respect the member's passion, but I have one factual question for him I wonder if he could try to answer to the best of his ability. Is he aware of any free trade agreement that the New Democratic Party has ever supported, because I have been here for 13 years and I cannot recall one?

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Pat Martin:

The people I hang with are for fair trade, Madam Speaker.

My colleague may remember the points that we made when the FTA was signed, when NAFTA was signed and when SPP was being promoted. We have always argued that trade agreements should contain clauses that stipulate both parties to standards of human rights, labour rights and environmental standards, otherwise we engage in this race to the bottom, as it were, and it is not a fair trade agreement at all. Free trade does not necessarily raise all boats, as the zealots would have us believe. In fact, the opposite is often true.

(1625)

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Paul Szabo (Mississauga South, Lib.):

Madam Speaker, I welcome the member's input into this matter. He always does it with passion.

In the briefing notes I was looking at, there is presumption that a rules based trade system will somehow address the problems of the drug trade in Colombia. I can only assume that the drug business out of Colombia is probably one of the most profitable ventures with certainly lots of support and interest of various nefarious types of people.

I am wondering if the member has any response to those who suggest that a trade deal with Colombia at this time would have any meaningful impact on the drug trade in Colombia.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Pat Martin:

Madam Speaker, I think my colleague is sincere and genuinely interested in how we might help that country with the social problems it has and the criminal economy that seems to override any domestic economy from legitimate means.

Trade with other countries has often changed, I suppose, the patterns of both of the trading partners. In this case, however, we have no reason to believe that improved economic opportunities through trade with Canada will do anything to replace the illegal drug based economy that exists.

What we do know is that the current regime is linked to and connected to some very unsavoury activities. I wanted to use my time to pay tribute to some of my brothers and sisters in the labour movement who are being whacked in the streets for having the temerity to stand up for fair wages and working conditions in that country.

On April 18 of this year, the leader of a prison officers' union was assassinated as were nine members of his union. He was the ninth member of this particular union to be killed.

The teachers union seems to be targeted quite often. Dorado Cardona, a member of the Association of Teachers, received death threats saying that he has been considered a military target and will be killed. He has not yet been killed but he has received these threats.

Because people speak out for workers' rights, it makes them a target of the paramilitary. Do we really want to enter into any kind of free trade agreement with a country with that kind of record? I certainly do not.

[Translation]

[Table of Contents]

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Denise Savoie):

The hon. member for Brome—Missisquoi has only one minute for a very brief question.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Christian Ouellet (Brome—Missisquoi, BQ):

Madam Speaker, I will be brief.

I would first like to congratulate my colleague. I do not often agree with him, but his position on unions is excellent. Very briefly, in 30 seconds, could he tell us why there will be no progress in Colombia as far as unions are concerned, once this agreement has been signed?

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Pat Martin:

Madam Speaker, first, the elimination of trade union activists and leadership is paving the way. It is laying the foundation for the implementation of this new liberalized trade regime. It was a necessary prerequisite to whack 2,700 trade union leaders. Can members imagine what would happen if the leaders of the teachers union, the carpenters union and the steelworkers union were all assassinated in their home communities? There goes the leadership and the backbone of the trade union movement in that country, leaving the workers vulnerable to whatever trade regime is imposed on them by this new international agreement. It is an atrocity. It is a travesty--

[Table of Contents]

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Denise Savoie):

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel.

[Translation]

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Mario Laframboise (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, BQ):

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today on behalf of the Bloc Québécois to speak to Bill C-23, An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Colombia .

First of all, I must say that our party, the Bloc Québécois, is not in favour of this bill. The main reason that the Canadian government wants to sign this free trade agreement has nothing to do with trade and everything to do with investments. This agreement contains a chapter on investment protection, making it easier for Canadians to invest in Colombia, particularly in mining. This is important to note, because we are in the middle of an economic crisis brought on by the investments made by our bankers. That is the reality.

The Conservative government let the major Canadian banks invest in certain areas, and Quebeckers and Canadians lost huge amounts of money as a result. In fact, every three months, dividends were being paid to shareholders without regard for the quality of the investments made.

It is the same thing with this Canada-Colombia free trade agreement. In order to ensure a return on the investments of Canadian mining companies, who want to pay dividends to their shareholders every three months at all costs, these companies are being given free reign to invest in Colombia with no regard for such things as human rights and environmental protection legislation.

This is why the Bloc Québécois is opposed to the bill. I must say that the Bloc Québécois, and our sister party, the Parti Québécois, have always been big proponents of both economic and commercial free trade. We were in favour of free trade, but agreements had to respect the laws and the quality of life of the people of all communities that are a party to the free trade agreement.

That was the case with the United States, and that was the case with Mexico and the United States under NAFTA. However, in this free trade agreement, the Conservative Party listened to the mining lobby without ever listening to Quebeckers. When it comes to doing business with foreign countries, Quebeckers want above all for human rights and quality of life to be respected and protected under international environmental laws. This free trade agreement does not guarantee in any way the respect of human rights and rights related to respecting the environment.

Judging by all the investment protection agreements Canada has signed over the years, the one that would bind Canada and Colombia would be ill conceived. All these agreements contain clauses that enable foreign investors to sue the local government if it takes measures that reduce the return on their investment. Such clauses are especially dangerous in a country where labour and environmental protection laws are uncertain at best.

By protecting a Canadian investor against any improvement in living conditions in Colombia, such an agreement could delay social and environmental progress in this country, where the need for progress is great. If these Canadian companies push the limit because they want to make profits above all else, and if they do not respect human rights and international environmental laws, they could commit irreparable acts causing international relations problems with respect to offences under international law, in turn resulting in bad publicity. The reputation of all Quebeckers and Canadians would be tarnished.

We have to prevent that from happening. That is our purpose in this House. That is why we were elected: to protect our laws, our territories, our quality of life and the quality of life of those we do business with. If we want to leave our children and our grandchildren with a good quality of life, we have to start by setting an example in our business relations with those with whom we sign free trade agreements.

This agreement is all about investments. It is designed to enable companies to make money at the expense of environmental laws and laws that protect human rights and the quality of human life.

(1630)

Colombia's human rights record is one of the worst in the world and certainly in Latin America. In order to promote human rights in the world, governments generally use the carrot and the stick. They support efforts to improve respect for human rights and reserve the right to withdraw benefits should the situation worsen. With this free trade agreement, Canada would forego any ability to bring pressure to bear. In fact, not only would it give up the possibility of using the carrot and stick approach, but it would be surrendering all power to the Colombian government.

The government keeps saying that this agreement would come with a side agreement on labour and another one on the environment. The fact of the matter is that such agreements are notoriously ineffective. They are not part of the free trade agreement, which means that investors could destroy with impunity Colombia's rich natural environment, displace populations to facilitate mine development or continue murdering unionists.

That goes against Quebeckers' values. We not only defend the interests of Quebeckers in this House, but we represent their values, one of which is respect for human rights. That applies to everyone we do business with.

The Conservative government, supported by the Liberals—because we can see they want to give their support—wants to give companies the capacity to invest. I will come back to my initial analogy. The government did the same thing with the banks, giving them the flexibility to make huge profits and pay quarterly dividends. But none of the big banks predicted the latest crisis. These people were being paid big bucks to speak to chambers of commerce and travel all over the place. They were invited everywhere. They told us that everything was just fine, but like sheep, they were caught making bad investments, and most Quebeckers and Canadians lost pension money as a result. That is what happens when the government gives companies leeway, as it is doing in this case with the mining sector or as it did with the banks, without restricting what they can do.

The Conservatives are hesitating yet again. There is an international movement to prevent bankers from collecting astronomical bonuses, but Canada is not following suit. Once again the government is prepared to trust the very people who are laughing at us behind our backs. That is what happened. They had a good laugh at our expense. That is the truth. I do not want us to sign a free trade agreement that will give mining company presidents an opportunity to line their pockets at our expense or at the planet's just because they can unapologetically take advantage of the Government of Canada's support. They can invest in Colombia without complying with international environmental laws and human rights.

That is the truth. We must be their conscience because making money at any price is the order of the day for big-time investors, just like it is for top banking executives. Their only goal is to ensure a payout for their shareholders every three months. That is how banking executives get their year-end bonuses, regardless of what might happen to people or, in the case of this free trade agreement, to Colombians.

It should come as no surprise that the Bloc Québécois will not support an agreement that strips the government of its ability to pressure the Colombian government, which is not exactly an exemplary government. I will not repeat the examples given by other members of the House, examples to do with the assassination of union organizers and anyone else who might oppose the regime. We know that the Colombian government is corrupt to the core. Is there any reason to sign an agreement with these people other than to enable Canadian investors to collect a profit every three months?

(1635)

We have to act as their conscience. We have to act as the conscience for mining company presidents. We have to tell them that this time, they will not be allowed to go too far. That is what we plan to do.

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP):

Madam Speaker, I am not at all surprised that the Bloc members support the NDP on this issue, and we support them.

What surprises me is the position of the Liberals, particularly the member for Mississauga South who the other day sounded like he was on our side on the issue. Today, we heard the speech of the member for Kings—Hants in which he said that Colombia's human rights record was improving. Another Liberal member said this afternoon that she was unaware of any trade unionists being killed. She said that she would not support the bill if she had this information.

The information is out there. In fact, 2,690 trade unionists have been murdered in Colombia since 1986. In 2008 the number of murders was up by 18% over the previous year. This year alone there have been 29 murders, with six or seven of them in the last thirty days.

(1640)

[Translation]

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Mario Laframboise:

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question. I have been talking about the banks and this is an opportunity to give an illustration. When I was first elected to this House in 2000, the first lobbyists I had to deal with were bank lobbyists, for the banks wanted to merge. That was their M.O. The Liberals were in power at the time.

I met with them and asked them why. I told them they were already making profits that were growing tremendously every quarter, and I asked them why they wanted to merge. They said it was because they wanted to buy other banks, for example, American banks. We voted against the whole bank merger idea. We saved those banks. They would be bankrupt today.

We must do the same thing with mining companies. We must act as the conscience of these business owners, who want nothing more than to pay dividends every quarter, regardless of whether or not they are respecting international environmental standards and human rights. That is not important to them. What they want is to earn profits every quarter. So we must be their conscience, and together, we must say no. We must vote against this bill. By doing so, we will send them the simple message that they cannot go to Colombia just to make a profit, without obeying the law.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Christian Ouellet (Brome—Missisquoi, BQ):

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate my hon. colleague from Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel on his very sensible, rational speech concerning our position.

However, I wonder if he might clarify something, because I heard the Conservative government say to the NDP earlier that that party is always against these agreements. We in the Bloc Québécois—I think this is the case, and I would like my colleague to confirm—are not systematically against free trade. We are against free trade when there is an imbalance, and when we cannot imagine that this kind of free trade will improve the situation, especially for workers, in a country like Colombia.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Mario Laframboise:

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. He is a hard worker. He is a passionate young man who likes to take part in every debate. I would be pleased to answer his question.

We belong to the sovereignist family. The Parti Québécois was in power in Quebec when the Conservatives signed the free trade agreement with the United States. The Parti Québécois supported that agreement. We are in favour of free trade agreements with countries that respect human rights, such as the U.S. This also applies to NAFTA. We were in favour of the NAFTA agreement with Mexico although we worked hard to strike a balance with respect to human rights in that country.

Yes, we are open to the world. The image that Quebec has always wanted to project is one of being open to the world in terms of respect for human rights, the rights of individuals and for the environment. This will always be a guiding principle for us.

In this case, we are about to give rights to private corporations and mining companies that, in the past, showed themselves to be incapable of respecting these rights because all they were interested in was turning a profit at the end of each quarter. We cannot accept this. We must be their conscience. I am pleased to be part of a political party that serves as their conscience in this House.

[English]

[Table of Contents]

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Denise Savoie):

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform that House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, Arts and Culture; the hon. member for Windsor West, Foreign Investment.

(1645)

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Paul Dewar (Ottawa Centre, NDP):

Madam Speaker, I rise in the House to bring forward my contributions to the debate on the Colombia free trade proposal in Bill C-23.

I want to take us to a point where we can talk about Canada's place in the world. As the foreign affairs critic and looking at where our country is in this multipolar world, I would like to take some time to situate Canada's role as not only a major economic player, but one that should take its role responsibly and view the effects on other jurisdictions when we enter into agreements such as the proposal in front of us.

I point to recent news from other places in Latin America. People living in some of the areas with extractive industries have paid a very heavy price because of Canadian companies operating without proper rules of engagement or proper oversight. Canadians want us to be a little more responsible as legislators in our oversight of the economic activities of our businesses abroad.

I also point to the most recent news out of Honduras. Sadly, we have seen the coup d'état there. The military is reasserting itself, replacing what many would see as a democracy that had been tenuous for sure, but had existed, with an elected office of the president. Right now Canadian companies are operating and making money there. At the same time, a horrific political situation is suppressing human rights. People are being abused and are disappearing.

I had some experience in Latin America and Central America in 1986. It was a time when death squads were running rampant. On one hand, companies were engaged in operations that were turning their backs on what was happening with the political situation. A convenient contract was going on between those who were responsible for political repression and those who were responsible for profit-taking.

I do not think Canadians want to see us go into these kinds of arrangements without doing due diligence. We see what is happening in Honduras today. Canadian companies are active there. We see the effects on the population of some of the economic activity. In a sense that gives what now is a coup d'état by the military a legitimacy. Canadians want to ensure that Canada's name is not being lent to that kind of anti-democratic action.

When we look at Colombia, the same applies. We do not want to see our Parliament give its approval to a trade agreement with a government that has if not directly implicated, been complicit with some very egregious human rights abuses.

Before I was elected to the House, I was a teacher. I read of the horrific situation and the human rights abuses of teachers in Colombia. I could not believe the testimonies when I first read about this issue. It was surreal. There were stories of teachers who were taken out by death squads, much like what happened in Central America in the eighties, which I witnessed when I was there. They would disappear, sometimes found miles down the road, sometimes not at all. It was not until I met a delegation of teachers from Colombia in Ottawa that it really came to light that this was happening to real people, real teachers.

(1650)

It was chilling. These teachers were not always targeted because they were members of the teachers union. Sometimes it was simply because they had spoken out against the government. At other times, it was simply their association with the teachers union. We have a responsibility as a country to ensure that, when we sign on to deals, we are not just somewhat certain but absolutely certain that the government we trade with is not complicit or ignoring human rights. That has to be a guarantee.

This has been mentioned many times, but I have to repeat it for people who are in the business of teaching children and education. To think that people are a target just because they speak out or are affiliated with a trade union or a teachers union does not rest well or easy with anyone. In this agreement, there are “side agreements”. When we have side agreements, that means they are not embedded. That means they are afterthoughts. We will have our truck and trade of goods and we will take a look at human, labour and environmental rights on the side.

If we look at other trade arrangements and co-operative economies like those in Europe, they are embedded in the trade agreement. They are embedded in the economic agreements that countries have between them. It is chilling in the sense that, for those of us who believe there has to be absolute certainty that human rights abuses will not be permitted and that there will not be a culture of impunity with the government with which we trade, we need to have these things embedded.

We do not have voluntary human rights in this country. It is not called the “voluntary charter of rights”. It is in our Constitution. It is something that is a guarantee. It is inconsistent and inconceivable that we would enter into a trade agreement with a country like Colombia with side agreements. That is really important.

For my friends in the Liberal Party, when we repatriated the Constitution, could anyone imagine that we would have said that we would have a side agreement on our Charter of Rights and Freedoms? People would have been out on the streets. In fact, people were out on the streets because aboriginal peoples and women were not originally included in our Constitution. People fought hard and it was repatriated with them in it. The same standard has to apply when we are trading with other countries and that includes Colombia.

I could give a very long list of the people who have lost their lives, not because they are part of a militia or a part of the insurgency, but because they were people who stood up to the government. They were human rights advocates, members of unions and people who said that they believed the government was not doing the right thing in environmental and labour standards. These are people who lost their lives.

Through you, Mr. Speaker, I say to the government, my colleagues in the opposition parties and specifically the Liberal Party, we cannot have substandard agreements. We cannot have a good conscience and say that we have done our best. In fact, it means that we are taking second best. When it comes to this place and our responsibility, second best does not rank. We must do better. That is why we oppose this agreement.

(1655)

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, Lib.):

Madam Speaker, I have a question for my colleague and I think it affects all of us. One of the problems with Colombia driving the FARC, the ELN and the paramilitaries is the fact that they get a lot of their moneys from drugs, primarily from cocaine and, to a lesser extent, heroin.

Would part of the solution be countries like ours getting their own house in order in terms of reducing the demand for these drugs? If there was not any demand, there would not be any supply. One of the great failures we have from the federal government's perspective is this. It is not willing to deal with the facts and adopt programs like NAOMI, which is the North American opiate medication initiative, and enable communities across our country to adopt those initiatives that would allow people to get away from consuming these drugs. This would reduce demand, enable people to get back to their lives, reduce harm, reduce incarceration and reduce costs. Is that not part of the solution in dealing with the problems in Colombia?

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Paul Dewar:

Madam Speaker, I agree with the member from B.C. on his idea of harm reduction. It is something we should pursue and take away the oxygen to many of the militias. This is why it is so important that we focus on that and not put our stamp of approval on a government that clearly is out of bounds when it comes to human rights. Yes, I would applaud that, and we should pursue it. However, for heaven's sake, let us not get involved with the kind of government that is overseeing some of these abuses and is involved in this kind of corruption. That is the wrong way to go.

[Translation]

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Christian Ouellet (Brome—Missisquoi, BQ):

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague from Ottawa Centre for his presentation in which he talked about teachers. We are all touched by his remarks. We are becoming increasingly aware of the fact that certain political parties in this House are siding with investors whereas other parties are supporting workers, teachers, ordinary people, miners and so forth.

I would like my colleague from Ottawa Centre to explain why they are supporting just the investors.

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Paul Dewar:

Madam Speaker, my colleague's question is at the core of what we are talking about.

Why do we have a government that does not want to sign on to corporate social responsibility in a real way? Why do we want to rush into a trade agreement with a country that has not put its house in order when it comes to human rights and environmental oversight?

What I think is at play is we have a government that is so enthusiastic about looking like it is expanding trade at any cost that it has forgotten about the core values of most Canadians. When we go abroad and we make deals with people, we have to ensure we check the whole package. In this case, it is only about the bottom line.

At the end of the day, it is just not worth it to trade with regimes that do not have their human rights or environmental houses in order. It is not worth it. The government needs to examine that a lot more carefully and the Liberal Party needs to do that as well. Trade at any price is not worth it.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. John Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, CPC):

Madam Speaker, I was intrigued by the member for Ottawa Centre. I am sure he was a very good teacher and a passionate one.

He reminded me when I was practising law many years. As a member of the Canadian Bar Association, we received a letter from a member of the judiciary of Colombia saying they needed interaction with Canadian lawyers and with judges because they were under threat all the time. They pleaded for us to take an interest and for more interaction, which would be facilitated by the type of agreement we are debating today.

Would the member respond to that?

(1700)

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Paul Dewar:

Madam Speaker, there is a way to engage without having to make things worse and this trade agreement makes things worse.

Through the Organization of American States, we could intervene. We could work with those who trying to bring democracy and fairness to civil society in Colombia, which is actually going on now. That is the route to go.

Until we see enough change, we should not be involved in this trade deal, and I think most Colombians—

[Table of Contents]

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Denise Savoie):

Resuming debate, the hon. member for British Columbia Southern Interior.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Alex Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior, NDP):

Madam Speaker, with regard to this agreement, we have talked about labour rights and I want to underline the fact that Colombia is one of the most dangerous countries on earth for trade unionists. We have had examples given by my hon. colleague, the member for Winnipeg Centre, and others who are saying that these folks are regularly victims of violence, intimidation and assassination.

This agreement does not have any kind of tough labour laws or labour standards. By putting these labour provisions in a side agreement, outside of the main text and without any enforcement mechanism, will not encourage Colombia to improve its horrendous human rights situation for workers and will actually justify the use of violence.

That is something that we have talked about here and I believe warrants more thought and consideration.

This agreement also does not really address the environment issue. It is addressed in a side agreement with no enforcement mechanism to force Canada or Colombia to respect environmental rights.

Then we come to another point that we have not really talked about a lot and that is the investor chapter. This is copied from NAFTA's chapter 11 which provides powerful rights to private companies to sue governments, enforceable through investor state arbitration panels.

I find this particularly worrying because of our many Canadian multinational oil and mining companies operating in Colombia. The arbitration system set up by chapter 11 gives foreign companies the ability to challenge legitimate Canadian environmental labour and social laws here in Canada. It will give the same opportunity to foreign companies in Colombia. I think this is absurd.

If we look at chapter 11 and what has happened in Canada as a result of this clause, we see that for example in early April American chemical company Dow sued the federal government for $2 million in damages it claimed it would suffer from Quebec's cosmetic pesticide law. This is absurd, a foreign company suing a Canadian government that wants to protect its citizens.

We have seen that our tax dollars have been used by the Canadian government to pay Ethyl Corporation, $13 million to be exact, for an out of court settlement following a challenge filed on April 14, 1997, to Canada's ban on the import and interprovincial trade of gasoline additive MMT, a suspected neurotoxin.

The list goes on and on. Our government has been challenged by chapter 11 of NAFTA and now we want to transport this clause to Colombia so that other multinationals including ours can challenge their laws. For this reason alone, we should not be signing this agreement.

We look at agriculture tariffs. We look at Colombia's poverty. We know that in Colombia 22% of the employment is in agriculture. An end to tariffs for cereals, pork and beef, although favourable to us, the trading partner, will flood the market with cheap products and lead to thousands of lost jobs.

We have seen this in Mexico. We have seen that 30% of the corn in Mexico consumed now is imported from the United States, which is heavily subsidized corn. It has displaced over two million and up to fifteen million, I am not sure of the exact count, farmers from the land who have not been able to compete with produce coming in from out of the country.

Personally, I do not think that Canadians would want to see their farmers being displaced because of goods coming into our country. Surely there must be a way to have fair trade in these commodities between our countries and not trade which displaces farmers off the land.

(1705)

[Translation]

I would like to talk about the fact that in any trade agreement, it is essential for fair trade to ensure full respect of human rights. The Canada-Colombia agreement is fundamentally flawed. It only tentatively addresses the issue, and does nothing to improve the serious problem with human rights in Colombia.

By ratifying the trade agreement with Colombia, Canada would be condoning a dangerous regime that is involved in acts of violence and murder against its own citizens. We heard a number of examples in our discussions today. The “kill a trade unionist, pay a fine” provision is ridiculous. It is particularly offensive. Under this provision, when a trade unionist is killed in Colombia, the government would simply have to pay into a development fund, up to a maximum of $15 million per year. That is unacceptable.

The Canada-Colombia agreement is essentially a reproduction of the outdated trade approach taken by former President George Bush. In the United States, Congress put a hold on the U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement last year, and President Barack Obama has said he will not pursue the agreement because of the human rights abuses. If our neighbour to the south had second thoughts about this agreement, the least we could do is carefully examine the agreement before us today and not blindly accept it.

In 2008, the House of Commons Standing Committee on International Trade recommended that we not sign any agreements with Colombia until they have improved their human rights record. It also recommended that we conduct a human rights impact assessment to determine the real repercussions of a trade agreement. The government completely disregarded this report. This is another example of how the government does not listen to its own committees, in this case, the Standing Committee on International Trade.

Members in this House have said that they will support this bill. The Standing Committee on International Trade published a report in June 2006 recommending that Canada not sign and implement a free trade agreement with Colombia before conducting an independent, impartial, and comprehensive human rights impact assessment. That was recommendation No. 4.

I would also like to applaud and thank my colleague from Burnaby—New Westminster for the work he has done to raise awarene