Mr. Speaker, it is an interesting day to be discussing Bill C-3 when we see what is going on in Canada and what we could be talking about.
There are so many things that are happening that this House should be discussing and debating today other than Bill C-3. I have nothing against Bill C-3. However, if we look at what is going on in Canada and happening across our great country, we see our country being ripped apart and torn to shreds.
I will give members a couple of examples of some of the things we could be talking about that have a day-to-day impact on Canadians.
We could have spent some time this week talking about the coronavirus. We have Canadians who are still trying to get out of China. We have situations around the world where passengers cannot leave cruise ships. We could have been debating that and what we should be doing about it. We could have been making sure that we have the proper safety protocols in place and that we are immensely prepared for this type of virus. However, we did not.
We have started NAFTA hearings at committee. This would have been a great week to show all the problems with NAFTA. This party is here to support and pass it, because we are being told to and we would never play silly bugger with it. We have expressed that right from day one, but there are things in NAFTA that need to be talked about.
This week at committee we heard from witnesses who will be negatively impacted by this agreement. They are not saying we should not sign it or that we should not move it forward. They understand how important it is to the Canadian economy and that it has to happen. However, they are asking the Liberal government for a plan to help them mitigate the downside of the agreement.
Aluminum producers in Chicoutimi are asking for some support in taking their product to the next level to add value to their aluminum products. That would be a plan, but there is no plan from the government. We could have had great debates on that and what we could do to help the different sectors.
The dairy sector is being kneecapped in this agreement. Not only is it facing importations of 3.5%, it is also facing restrictions. It is being told what it can sell, when it can sell it and who it can sell it to. That has never happened in a trade agreement. That would have been a good debate here to look at ways to mitigate that type of scenario.
We could have been talking about the China-Senegal situation, which is the PM's cost for a UN Security Council seat. He has his Mastercard out, paying $50 million here and $50 million there. We should have had a debate this week in the House on just how expensive this seat is going to be and if he will actually have success in getting it. However, we did not talk about it.
The Lima Group was here in Ottawa talking about Venezuela. I do not think anybody realized that. That is ironic, because that is where our country is heading to right now. If we do not have trains running, there will be no toilet paper in the stores in a couple of weeks. That is the reality.
The Liberals can deny it all they want, but their inaction on this file has been so terrible it is unreal. Canadians are going to pay.
The other thing we should have been talking about in light of all these things is the impact it is having on the economy, jobs and growth. There is going to be a huge cost. Nobody is even talking about that cost.
Hon. Ed Fast: It's billions.
Mr. Randy Hoback: Billions is right.
The Liberals can say they are doing what they can and are seized with it at the moment, but the reality is they have done nothing. They have let it go on and now we have the result. Somebody is probably going to get hurt. It is really disappointing.
Canadians can expect more than a debate on a piece of administrative legislation when thousands are facing job losses because of radical activists who are exploiting divisions within the Wet'suwet'en community and holding the Canadian economy hostage.
Therefore, I move:
That the debate be now adjourned.