March 13, 1992

PC

William C. Winegard (Minister for Science)

Progressive Conservative

Hon. William C. Winegard (Minister for Science):

Madam Speaker, it is a little hard to know from the tone of the conversation so far, but this is a serious debate we are undertaking here today. The continued success of our trade performance is critical to our future prosperity as a nation. I think every Canadian from coast to coast to coast has a stake in the export success of our entrepreneurs and that is why this government from the day it took office has placed international trade at the top of its agenda.

We have pursued a strategy aimed at making Canada an international competitor worthy of the tough global economy that we have today. I emphasize "global" and I emphasize "today".

We do not live in the past, nor do we intend to. We cannot lift the drawbridge and keep the world out. We have faith in the ability of Canadian companies to compete with known rules of the game. That is really what this is about. To be successful our trade strategy must reflect the realities of today's global economy and Canada's place in it. Regretfully there is no room for romantic and fanciful delusions based on past or imagined successes.

The resolution before us today gives the illusion of promoting a global strategy, but at heart it is a council of despair. It seeks a world that simply does not exist, a world that would ignore the realities of geography, a world that would not recognize the benefits of foreign investment, a world that would tear up our trade agreements, isolate us from our principal trading partners; a world that would turn its back on the achievements of the past, as emphasized by the comments from my colleague from Mississauga, and leave us naked before the challenges of tomorrow.

This government's approach to international market development, to international trade negotiations and to international trade relations has been based on the fundamental premise that Canada is a global trading nation, no more, no less. It also recognizes that we live next door to the richest and most advanced economy on earth. Other countries would give their eye teeth to be so blessed. It is not an unmixed blessing, as we know so well, but surely it is a blessing and let us not believe otherwise.

The United States is our best customer and we are theirs. Last year alone we did $256 billion worth of business between the two countries. No other countries come close to that. It is quality business. It is not just rocks and logs but it is cars and computers. It is software and engineering contracts. It is satellites and subway cars. It is flight simulators and wing assemblies. The Japanese would love to do that much business, so would the Mexicans and the Europeans and indeed, everyone else; except it seems members opposite.

March 13, 1992

They would tear up the agreement that provides the security for trade, the agreement that furnishes the framework of rules and procedures that gives Canadians the confidence to take on tough markets, the agreement that provides the foundation for two million jobs in Canada.

Our appreciation of that agreement and the trade it represents should not be misled by focusing entirely on irritants. Such irritants are not a sign of weakness but the result of strength. They are a recognition by American interests that we are successful traders. That does not make them easier to accept. These trade disputes sting but it should at least give us some perspective on this whole issue.

Five per cent of our exports to the United States are affected by the current list of irritants. We do not like that number. We do not like the irritants but we have to reduce the number. We have to remember also that 95 per cent of the trade is flowing freely, exactly as we would like.

We are confident with respect to the irritants that right is on our side. Tearing up the agreement would place the 95 per cent at risk. How is that for a great trade strategy? Who would benefit from such a flight from reality? To compound the error of tearing up the FTA, the resolution would have Canada walk away from the NAFTA negotiations.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ALLOTTED DAY, S. O. 81-TRADE
Permalink
?

An hon. member:

And the GATT.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ALLOTTED DAY, S. O. 81-TRADE
Permalink
PC

William C. Winegard (Minister for Science)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Winegard:

And the GATT, as my colleague says. Not only would the resolution ensure a trade war with the United States, it would tell Canada and by implication our Latin American trading partners that we are not prepared to work with them, that we are no longer interested in creating a trading future based on a framework of stable and orderly rules. Make no mistake, that is what the NAFTA negotiations are all about and that is what we would turn our back on.

The GATT world trade talks are an integral and critical element in Canada's trade strategy. It is neither an alternative to nor unrelated to the FTA or the NAFTA. They are all a concerted effort by Canada and its trading partners to create a more ordered and more predictable global trading system. Each is an effort to strengthen the rules, to improve procedures to resolve disputes and to bind nations to a common approach to the regulation of trade and investment.

Supply

For Canada, the success of these negotiations is critically important. It will help us gain and defend access to the markets of the world, including the United States and Mexico. In other words, we have not placed our eggs in a single basket, rather we are defending and promoting Canadian trade interests wherever there is an opportunity to do so.

I just came back from an OECD meeting of science and technology ministers having to do with the economy and growth. The whole meeting, with governments of every stripe, concentrated on how we can all be more prosperous, how we can all trade with each other, how we can all have economies of benefit if we have the rules of the game clearly spelled out. That is what this is all about.

Our trade with the United States is important, but so is our trade with the rest of the world.

In 1991, our trade with all of our trading partners totalled $381.6 billion; that is one-quarter of our Gross Domestic Product. Trade with countries other than the United States totalled $124.7 billion. You have to remember that merchandise exports of $34.1 billion translate into more than a million jobs for Canadians. Our merchandise trade with countries other than the United States is growing. Our global approach has been instrumental in a 5 per cent annual growth in that trade since we took office.

Those numbers are the result of Canada's multi-faceted, global trade strategy. Canadian entrepreneurs know that wherever they go they can count on the support of Canada's 1,060 trade commissioners. They know where to find them at 90 offices across the world, at headquarters and at international trade centres across Canada. They know they can rely on hundreds of agreements that Canada has negotiated to smooth their way: air agreements, double tax agreements, economic co-operation agreements, investment agreements, export financing agreements.

Canadian exporters know that they can draw on the support programs developed to assist their marketing efforts: the Program for Export Market Development (PEMD), trade fairs and missions, the Strategic Ventures Program, Going Global, CIDA Inc., the EDC and more.

There is probably not a member in this House who has not used one or more of those programs to promote trade in their own constituency. It is interesting that

March 13, 1992

when it comes to their home constituencies, they want Canada to be an international trading partner and they want Canada to have these kinds of programs which promote their own constituency, but when it gets to the global enterprise, somehow or another they cannot quite manage to grasp the significance of what is being done.

The programs that I have mentioned do not cater to the multinational corporate elite, as you would have believed from listening to the comments earlier. They are for Canadian companies large and small. They are for companies that are found right across Canada; Halifax, Guelph, Gravelburg, Saskatchewan. They employ your neighbours and mine. Our programs are not just for big companies, they are for all Canadian companies.

Our strategy for trade starts at home. We will not be successful traders abroad unless we are successful competitors at home.

I have travelled across this country in the last two years, talking about what we need to do to be a competitive nation, telling the people about the use of technology and how it will help us in terms of economic growth, giving facts and figures of the difficulties as I see them and there has been a response. The whole prosperity initiative is based upon these kinds of discussions with Canadians from coast to coast. They do not want us to rip up the FTA. They want us to continue our discussions with NAFTA. They understand that Canada is a trading nation and must remain so.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ALLOTTED DAY, S. O. 81-TRADE
Permalink
PC

Andrée Champagne (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Madam Deputy Speaker:

Unfortunately, I will have to interrupt the hon. minister. He will have a little more than eight minutes remaining when we resume debate.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ALLOTTED DAY, S. O. 81-TRADE
Permalink

STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S. O. 31

PC

Godfrey Stanley (Stan) Wilbee

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Stan Wilbee (Delta):

Madam Speaker, yesterday there was a collision between a British Columbia ferry and a Japanese bulk coal carrier off Roberts Bank which is located in my riding of Delta.

The 17 injured passengers were taken to Delta hospital for acute emergency care. Although the hospital only has 75 acute care beds, because it is on many major transportation links and the only hospital south of the Fraser River it has developed an excellent emergency and disaster control program.

This hospital had also handled several casualties from the fatal bus crash on Highway 99 the day before and these casualties had strained the bed situation. In spite of that they handled the emergencies very well yesterday.

I would like to commend the paramedics involved in transporting the injured as well as the administrator, the nursing staff and my former medical colleagues at the Delta hospital for a job well done in bringing good care and comfort to those injury victims. Their planning, practice and expertise has once again paid off in an excellent way.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S. O. 31
Sub-subtopic:   DELTA HOSPITAL
Permalink

THE CONSTITUTION

LIB

William Warren Allmand

Liberal

Hon. Warren Allmand (Notre-Dame-de-Grace):

Madam Speaker, the Minister Responsible for Constitutional Affairs has considerably angered Quebecers by recently suggesting that they would lose their Canadian citizenship if Quebec separates.

In the first place, ministers of the government should not speculate on what might happen as a result of any sovereignty referendum.

Second, the minister is absolutely wrong with respect to the law. At present Canadian law permits dual citizenship. One can be a Canadian and at the same time an American. One can be a Canadian and an Italian.

Furthermore, one can live for a considerable period of time in another country and still retain one's Canadian citizenship.

The only way a Canadian can lose his or her citizenship is by deliberately renouncing it. Obviously, those who vote for Quebec separation would want to do that. But those who do not will have every right to retain this important heritage. Quebecers are worried enough about the situation in their province and do not need unnecessary speculation to upset them even more.

March 13, 1992

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   THE CONSTITUTION
Permalink

HEALTH CARE

PC

Walter Leland Rutherford (Lee) Clark (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Lee Clark (Brandon-Souris):

Madam Speaker, virtually all Canadians are understandably proud of medicare and the quality of health care which it provides on a universal basis.

Consequently, we are shocked and dismayed when American politicians, as they do on occasion, criticize medicare for what they claim to be its shortcomings.

You can imagine how surprised and angered Canadians would be, therefore, if they had had the opportunity to read the February 27, 1992 edition of The Brandon Sun and to discover that a Canadian politician speaking in Neepawa, Manitoba, in fact the leader of the Reform Party, had promised to abolish medicare as a universal program.

Perhaps the leader of the Reform Party who is the son of a Social Credit premier undoubtedly enjoyed a privileged upbringing and does not understand the importance of medicare to ordinary Canadians of all ages and particularly to seniors.

Perhaps he does not understand, therefore, that Canadians will not permit any politician or any party, including those whose roots are in the distant past to destroy medicare as we know it.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   HEALTH CARE
Permalink

THE SENATE

LIB

Ron J. Duhamel

Liberal

Mr. Ronald J. Duhamel (St. Boniface):

Madam Speaker, I was extremely disappointed that neither the Conservative Party nor the New Democratic Party members of the Special Joint Committee on a Renewed Canada, better known as the Beaudoin-Dobbie committee of which I was a member, would support the Liberal Party's request to have a strong and effective Senate by ensuring that the Senate's decisions could not be overridden or could not easily be overridden by the House of Commons. If you are going to reform the Senate, surely it must among other things, be effective.

The Liberal Party members registered their dissent on this point on page 55 of the committee report which reads:

"Liberal members-disagree with the majority recommendation concerning the powers of the Senate because of the proposed override of a Senate veto of legislation. Such an override, and it was a simple override, will undermine the effectiveness of the Senate-Therefore, the Liberal members of the committee recommend that a reformed Senate be granted an absolute veto on all bills, except for appropriation and budget bills."

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   THE SENATE
Permalink

STATUS OF WOMEN

NDP

Margaret Anne Mitchell

New Democratic Party

Ms. Margaret Mitchell (Vancouver East):

Madam Speaker, International Women's Week is over but double discrimination continues against women of colour and immigrant women.

Domestic workers are locked into live-in jobs where they can be exploited and new policies will exclude many women of colour from coming to Canada as domestics.

Lack of professional accreditation forces many immigrant women to remain in low-paying jobs.

The Tory budget also has added another layer of hardship for these women. The $1 million cut to Canada Jobs Strategy training represents a 35 per cent cut to immigrant women who also lack child care.

Payments owing for pay equity are denied women public servants.

The Court Challenges Program which gave women of colour a chance to achieve equality rights through our courts is cancelled.

The legislated Race Relations Foundation to fight racism is indefinitely postponed.

This government has lost all respect for the rights of minorities, and especially for women of colour who are doubly jeopardized.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   STATUS OF WOMEN
Permalink

HALTON-PEEL SURVEY

PC

Garth Turner

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Garth Turner (Halton-Peel):

Madam Speaker, my constituents continue to offer me some excellent advice and comment.

Ron Fotheringham of Bolton, Ontario writes: "We should enact a simple vocabulary change. We should remove the word 'government' from our vocabulary and substitute the word 'taxpayer' in some cases 'taxpayers representatives'. It changes all our headlines and makes one re-think concepts like, 'The federal government today contributed Y-million dollars to the purchase of de

Havilland'; 'Metro government calls upon the federal government for aid in covering welfare payments to refugees'; 'Your provincial government will ask the federal government for help in these tough economic times'. I have been replacing 'government' with 'taxpayer' in what I hear, read and say. The impact of this vocabulary change is truly amazing. Try it yourself for a week."

And finally, John Benitz of Belfountain, Ontario, simply sends this message: "The silent majority want a united Canada. We also want Canada to be a privilege to enter as an immigrant and not a right. We want to afford our social programs and not burden our children with our debt."

Thank you, Madam Speaker, for this opportunity to air my constituents' views.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   HALTON-PEEL SURVEY
Permalink

SUSSEX, NEW BRUNSWICK

PC

Robert Alfred Corbett

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Bob Corbett (Fundy-Royal):

Madam Speaker, I would like to draw the attention of all hon. members to a recent survey by Chatelaine magazine which names Sussex, New Brunswick, which is located in my riding of Fundy-Royal, as being one of the top 10 towns to live in in Canada.

Sussex, considered by some to be the quintessential rural community, offers its residents the opportunity to ski the slopes of Poley Mountain, enjoy the splendour and magnificent sights of Fundy National Park on a year-long basis, and participate in the many festivals offered throughout the year.

If that were not enough to make one live in Sussex, it also enjoys a sound agricultural base, two potash mines and several food and dairy processors to maintain the 90 per cent regional employment rate.

I know that all members of this House will want to join with me in congratulating Sussex on being named one of the top 10 towns to live in.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   SUSSEX, NEW BRUNSWICK
Permalink

GASOLINE ADDITIVES

LIB

Ralph Ferguson

Liberal

Hon. Ralph Ferguson (Lambton-Middlesex):

Madam Speaker, Canadian consumers are being ripped off by paying for pollution controls that are being damaged by the fuel additive MMT, that may also be putting the health of this nation at risk.

The average new car purchased in Canada costs $16,790. Ford Canada says newer model cars will require an additional $800 worth of emission control devices to meet the green plan's new hydrocarbon emission standards.

Yet as the United States Environmental Protection Agency states in their final notice rejecting the use of MMT in the United States in unleaded fuel for the fourth time: "Ford concluded that the data clearly show that MMT impairs to a significant degree the performance of emission control devices."

The EPA also noted:

"Toyota also submitted data indicating that the efficiency at which the catalyst was operating for the MMT-exposed components was less than that for the non-MMT exposed components."

The green plan emission standards are fraudulent as long as MMT is allowed in Canadian fuel. I call on the government to examine the U.S. EPA decision, the Ford and Toyota evidence, and to replace MMT with the environmentally friendly alternative, ethanol.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   GASOLINE ADDITIVES
Permalink

March 13, 1992