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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tracey Ramsey

Transcript

Adjournment Proceedings

Discussions (0)