Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 350
View Jacques Gourde Profile
CPC (QC)
View Jacques Gourde Profile
2021-02-23 14:56 [p.4454]
Mr. Speaker, dairy farmers and processors have been waiting for months to get the compensation that the Liberal government promised them to make up for the market share they lost as a result of the free trade agreements signed with our trade partners.
Will the government provide some predictability and, most importantly, will it do so before March 31, 2021? Could the minister confirm that?
View Marie-Claude Bibeau Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that we have committed to providing $1.75 billion to dairy farmers for the first two agreements with Europe and the trans-Pacific region.
We are ahead of schedule on these payments. The vast majority of farmers got their second payment in the last few weeks, and they already know how much they will get next year and the following year. In addition, I will soon be announcing the details of the $691-million compensation package for poultry and egg farmers.
View Richard Martel Profile
CPC (QC)
View Richard Martel Profile
2021-02-19 11:35 [p.4310]
Madam Speaker, today marks the start of an advertising campaign for dairy, poultry and egg processors.
Since 2015, these groups have been waiting for government compensation as a result of the free trade agreement with Europe and the TPP. The Liberals have had six years to honour their commitment. They have not done so despite their promises. The government must give our local processors the compensation that was promised.
What are they waiting for to take action?
View Neil Ellis Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Neil Ellis Profile
2021-02-19 11:36 [p.4310]
Madam Speaker, Canada's supply-managed dairy, poultry and egg farmers play a critical role in keeping our rural communities vibrant. In order to offer dairy farmers more certainty, our government announced that the remaining $1.4 billion of compensation would be delivered over a timeline of three years.
For Canada's 4,800 chicken, egg, broiler hatching egg and turkey farmers our government also announced $691 million for a 10-year program.
We will always be there to defend supply management. We will not make any further market access concessions.
View Richard Martel Profile
CPC (QC)
View Richard Martel Profile
2021-02-19 11:36 [p.4311]
Madam Speaker, if I were a member of the Liberal government, I would be embarrassed to repeat the same thing week after week. I wonder if the Liberals even believe what they are saying. The new Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement was signed last year.
How long will it take to get this compensation, given that they are waiting on the two others? Our local processors are closing their doors and family businesses are being lost.
What is the government waiting for to take action?
View Neil Ellis Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Neil Ellis Profile
2021-02-19 11:37 [p.4311]
Madam Speaker, we promised to fully and fairly compensate the supply-managed sectors, and that is what we did. For the dairy sector to give an example, that represents $38,000 each year for the owner of a farm with 80 dairy cows. For chicken, egg, broiler hatching egg and turkey sectors, these programs will drive innovation and growth for farmers.
We will always be there to defend supply management and will not make any further market access concessions.
View Paul Manly Profile
GP (BC)
View Paul Manly Profile
2021-02-18 16:13 [p.4264]
Madam Speaker, I am going to support this motion, because I agree that we need to call out China for its human rights abuses, as this is a genocide and we need to do something about it. I am seriously concerned about our trade integration with China and the Canada-China FIPA that we have. We have heard several times different members say that the old China is not the same as the new China. When we had the team Canada trade missions to China after Tiananmen Square, I would have said that was a bit of a naive move, and I think that having the Canada-China FIPA as a locked-in agreement for 31 years is seriously problematic.
How are we going to deal with China in terms of that investment treaty and the integration of our supply chain with, and our dependence on, China?
View Dan Albas Profile
CPC (BC)
Madam Speaker, I would simply say that if the member wants to support this motion for whatever reason, because I believe it is the right thing morally for us to do as a country, that is good. I would not tie this to anything other than its being the right thing to do. This member can raise economic concerns and other matters—
View Michael Chong Profile
CPC (ON)
Madam Speaker, I have been listening to the speeches all day today and taking notes. I appreciate the member's comments on the amendment and the motion in front of the House.
In the member's opinion, what are the most effective measures that democracies could take in concert to put pressure on China to change? Is it Magnitsky sanctions on particular Chinese officials? Is it using trade sanctions? Is it other forms of pressure, such as diplomatic pressure? Is it a reform of multilateral institutions to put in place mechanisms to better hold China accountable for its infractions of international law and our international rules-based system? I am wondering what in his opinion would be the most effective tools available to democracies to effect change in China.
View John McKay Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Speaker, my immediate response is all of the above. The member and I had something to do with the creation of the Magnitsky sanctions in Canada. I like what they do in terms of targeting the most egregious perpetrators of these kinds of human rights abuses. However, the limitation of the Magnitsky sanctions is that the Government of China has a pervasive government policy to carry on, as it does, with trade deals.
If there was a mechanism by which realistic trade sanctions could be coordinated by trading nations that share the same values, I would be very supportive of it. Regrettably, however, Canada is a rather small player in a rather big pond, and unless and until we have pretty well everyone in place, our unilateral responses will be brushed off by the Government of China, with possibly gross reactions that are counterproductive to the best interests of the people we hope to help.
View John Williamson Profile
CPC (NB)
Mr. Speaker, I apologize for that breach.
The federal government has spent the last six years extolling and overstating the importance of China to our nation's well-being. It has wrongly promoted economic relations with this totalitarian regime as a key tenet of Canada's foreign policy. It called for a free trade agreement without answering how a free country like Canada can trade freely with a non-market economy like China.
The government tried to work with China on developing a vaccine, but instead, our health data was stolen and Canada lost months working to secure vaccines from reliable sources. As well, the Liberal government has largely been silent on Beijing's actions to crack down on democratic expressions beyond expressions of concerns and regret. This is the wrong approach. Communist China should be labelled a perpetrator of genocide and be viewed as an outcast state. As I said, it will not be easy.
We have more friends in mainland China than perhaps we realize. They are people who want the same freedoms that they see in Taiwan and, until recently, Hong Kong, before Beijing snuffed those freedoms out. Now more than ever, Canada needs a principled foreign policy that promotes freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law.
I must admit my hope is eternal. Some Liberals have stood up and said, “Enough.” This includes the Liberal member for Scarborough—Guildwood, the previous speaker. I applaud his courage. His long-standing position on these issues is well known. We can see today that more Liberal MPs realize they are on the wrong side of history. It is why we increasingly hear them say, as a way to excuse their past errors in judgment, that today's China is not the same as the China of two years ago. Of course, this is nonsense.
What has changed? Two years ago, the Liberal government was mugged by reality when two Canadians were illegally detained by China. Today's China is the same China that cracked down on students in Tiananmen Square 22 years ago. It is the same China that, after being admitted to the World Trade Organization, failed to adhere to its commitments to liberalize and open up. It is the same China that imprisons its citizens and denies them freedom of speech and press.
More recently, it is the China that has illegally expanded its territory throughout the South China Sea and claims much of that sea as its territory. Its pursuit of a predatory posture regarding our open economy is well known. It openly steals our technology and research, and let us not forget the hundreds of millions of Chinese citizens on the mainland who are denied the right to choose who will govern them.
As an aside, democracy is not alien to Chinese people. It is acted on and upheld by Taiwan, a small nation of 24 million people with democratic freedoms that mirror our own in Canada. I could go on about Beijing's recent belligerence, but I have made my points. To say that today's China is nothing like yesterday's China is to ignore its recent history under the Communists.
However, if my hon. Liberal colleagues believe today's China is acting in an uncivilized and unbecoming fashion, what are they prepared to do about it when we vote? I hope is not more nothing. I hope that on Monday they will vote on today's facts, which are that China is committing genocide against ethnic and religious minorities. They have said, “never again”, but we will see, and all Canadians will see, when that vote is called.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-02-18 17:12 [p.4272]
Mr. Speaker, the member says that the China of today has not changed at all from previous years.
Why does he believe the Harper administration entered into a secret trade agreement, without any form of parliamentary consultation, when there were human rights violations back then?
View John Williamson Profile
CPC (NB)
Mr. Speaker, it is my hope that today's government will repeal that agreement and move away from it.
View Francis Drouin Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to protecting and supporting our supply-managed producers. The proof is that we recently signed a transitional free trade agreement with the United Kingdom and we made no concessions on supply management.
Last week, the Prime Minister, several ministers, MPs and I met with dairy, poultry and egg producers to discuss the future of supply-managed agriculture. Can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food inform the House of compensation for supply-managed sectors?
View Marie-Claude Bibeau Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, we will be making compensation payments to dairy producers for the agreements signed with the European Union and the trans-Pacific region over the shorter period of four years.
More than 60% of them have already received their second payment, totalling $327 million. Programs for poultry and egg producers will follow and then it will be the turn of processors.
Our government is committed to protecting the supply management system and not giving up any more market share.
Results: 1 - 15 of 350 | Page: 1 of 24

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data