Committee
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 250
View Claude Guimond Profile
BQ (QC)
Good morning everyone.
Mr. Coles, earlier you mentioned precedents and jurisprudence. Chapter 11 deals with private interests versus the public good. Those are very valid questions we should be asking ourselves, as parliamentarians. We do indeed get the sense we are seeing a negative trend here, and there is no denying how disturbing this all is. Just look at the situation before us.
My question will be brief. As elected officials, what can we do in the future to prevent this kind of trend and restore the balance, so as to bring about a situation that is more acceptable to all sides?
View Claude Guimond Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Chair, I am somewhat disappointed that we have received no documentation, either from the officials or from the people appearing today. We have not received anything. I do not know if it is because we travelled to Washington last week, and there was no time as a result. Mr. Laforest and I have made this observation. We would have appreciated the witnesses sending us their notes.
I have been a member of this committee for two years. We have often discussed chapter 11. We must acknowledge that it is a sensitive issue. We are talking about legal drift and uncertainty. We are hearing all kinds of things. I appreciate the arguments made by Mr. Shrybman when he talks about what the future will bring in terms of natural resources. Last Sunday noon, I listened to a Radio-Canada program that was discussing potential shortages of oil, water and food. If we are not careful and if we do not take the necessary steps immediately, we risk facing serious consequences.
Mr. Van Harten, in your presentation, you spoke about arbitration and about judges being influenced, but particularly about the fact that Canada has not had much success until now. That shocked me. If that is the case, there must be case law that shows it. I would like to know what your statement is founded on, and, given that case law exists, how we are going to manage to salvage anything.
View Claude Guimond Profile
BQ (QC)
Pardon me. I believe our guest is speaking a little too quickly for the interpreter.
View Claude Guimond Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Doyle, you are no doubt aware of the motion of November 22, 2005. It was my colleague André Bellavance, from the Bloc Québécois, who sponsored it. So there's a little bit of him in that motion, which fortunately is still holding firm.
This supply management issue here in the House of Commons is still very current. However, I have to tip my hat to you and tell you that it is very much thanks to you, the agricultural producers under supply management, who are doing an excellent job convincing us of the importance of preserving supply management in all the bilateral negotiations we have increasingly had in the past few years.
To go a little further, Mr. Doyle, with regard to supply management, explain to us then, in your own words, how far we can go in preserving supply management so that we can maintain the balance and so that it is worth the trouble, and everything that's going on with regard to the potential TRQ expansion and the raising or lowering of customs tariffs. Where is the line in the sand?
View Claude Guimond Profile
BQ (QC)
That's absolutely normal. I must admit it's fortunate there is a consensus around the table on this point. Since I'm a dairy producer, I'm very pleased with that.
You obviously mentioned geographical indicators in your introduction. Once again, we know this really comes from Europe, but I would like you to tell me in concrete terms—you mentioned feta cheese, among other things—what the consequences would be for us if we opened those geographical indicators here. You mentioned small cheese makers, the industry. For us to get a clearer understanding, tell us what the actual consequences of all that are.
View Claude Guimond Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Clow, I would like to hear from you. The committee went to London and to the European Parliament in late November. We talked a lot about agriculture, but we also sensed that there were a lot of questions in Europe about GMOs and other issues. I would like you to bring us up to date on your production, GMOs and what agricultural products the Europeans want.
View Claude Guimond Profile
BQ (QC)
Yes, thank you very much. I'm very pleased with the answer. I believe that Europe is a very promising market for potatoes and for you in the Maritimes. This is good news for everyone.
View Claude Guimond Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, madam, gentlemen.
Mr. Stephenson, in your presentation, you said that we have a unique economic partnership. I agree with you. What we have with the United States is special in economic development terms. It's big, but I am one of those who think we still have to develop it. On Tuesday, at the last committee meeting, we listened to a forum broadcast on the CPAC channel. The subject was the challenge of continuing to develop trade while protecting our sovereignty. That word has a lot of importance for us at the Bloc Québécois; it has a visceral impact. We are in favour of it as well.
In your introduction, you mentioned the Agreement on Government Procurement that was negotiated and went into effect in February 2010. In that agreement, Canada and the United States gave each other 12 months to begin exploratory talks on a possible deepening of those commitments. That was a little more than 12 months ago. Where do things stand now? Have any steps been taken to move forward?
View Claude Guimond Profile
BQ (QC)
Did you adopt a timetable so the government can make decisions on that expansion?
View Claude Guimond Profile
BQ (QC)
I have a question that comes to mind given my nature and occupational bias. I talked about this last year when our committee was studying this agreement. Have you conducted any studies since February 2010 in order to acquire tools that will enable you to move forward with regard to the potential expanding of commitments? Do you have any data? What does this do, and for whom? Are there winners, losers?
View Claude Guimond Profile
BQ (QC)
Your answer is very clear. Thank you very much.
Earlier, Mr. Stephenson, you mentioned country of origin labelling. Nearly two years ago, I had the opportunity to attend meetings in Washington when the committee travelled there. During those meetings, we obviously discussed this problem at length. You summed up the situation, particularly with regard to the WTO. You seem optimistic. I'm a little less so. I hope your optimism will prevail.
We have definitely opted for the tribunals and WTO route. However, couldn't we be more proactive in agriculture, particularly with regard to beef and pork production? Have you explored options in that area?
In Quebec, for nearly 10 years now, we have invested a great deal in the traceability of our animals, cattle, lamb and pigs. In the past few months, a number of discussions have been held in Canada among a number of provinces to expand traceability, which gives us the opportunity to identify our animals from birth to the plate or supermarket, if we wish. It's a system with a highly reliable data base.
Did you consider proposing this kind of system to our American friends so we can have access to the same markets as they, so our products can have added value and we can secure larger market share there?
View Claude Guimond Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, lady and gentlemen.
I would like to come back to the last question of my colleague Mrs. Thi Lac. You said that, in the review of the legislation, we should define very clearly what is a lobbyist and what is the work of a lobbyist.
Did I understand correctly that answer you gave earlier?
Results: 1 - 15 of 250 | Page: 1 of 17

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

For more data options, please see Open Data