Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The legal consequences of the China-Canada Trade Agreement will be irreversible by any Canadian court or others for 31 years after the treaty is given effect. To sue a Chinese company requires only a minority share in a Canadian asset, and they’ll be able to challenge Canadian federal, territorial, provincial, et cetera, decisions outside of the Canadian legal system and Canadian courts. Our ability to ensure local benefits under socio-economic agreements or set out environmental conditions that diminish profits is questionable.
My question is for the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations. I’d like to ask what input we have had to these agreements. I am assuming this is a concern of the government and have we strenuously objected to those provisions.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, Mr. McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The question the Member is asking is very timely, considering we have just returned from a recent Council of Federation visit to China and noted the considerable interest in investing in Canada by the Chinese and vice versa. I can assure the Member that the CETA that he is referring to is not a trade agreement, but rather a bilateral agreement with China that will provide for reciprocity and protect investors that invest in China.
I appreciate the Minister’s comments. I wish they were relevant to my question.
I guess I would ask him again, national health spending on pharmaceuticals increased about $7 billion between 2005 and 2010. Under the CETA proposed provisions, costs would increase a further 22 percent. Our Ministers have told us these are significant proportions of our costs. We can’t be silent on this.
Will the Premier vigorously communicate to the federal government the negative consequences of such an agreement to our interests and ask that the drug provisions not be allowed, or has he done that already?
I’d like to answer his question but he keeps changing his question. I think now that he’s asking questions about the European Trade Agreement, we are participating in those negotiations and we are providing our input into those discussions.
Some people, obviously, would call this agreement with China selling out the farm. Obviously, from our recent visit to China that the Premier mentioned, there is no lack of interest. I don’t see the need to sell the farm in order to generate business with China.
In terms of the European Trade Agreement, other provisions would also limit territorial and provincial jurisdictions’ abilities to legislate local purchasing preference, exactly what our BIP, for example, was created to achieve. These were enabled under the NAFTA provisions to protect these provisions.
Has the Premier written, or will he write to the Prime Minister and state this government’s strong opposition to the creation of any such restrictions under a new European Trade Agreement?
There are 24 FEPAs, as we call it, that are in place or underway. There are no negotiations with regard to the bilateral agreement between Canada and China. It’s been negotiated, it’s been agreed to so that there is reciprocity between both countries and the investments made by Canadians in China would be protected. It is going forward for approval and we are waiting to see what happens there, because it will provide benefits for investors both into Canada and by Canadians into China.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I assume from the responses so far that, in fact, we have had no input to that agreement with China, that bilateral agreement. The Quebec government has invited comments from its citizens to add the public voice to its opposition or input. This government has announced its intention to consult the public on a new economic development strategy.
Will the Premier ensure that any consultation on new Cabinet policy invites our citizens to state their views on the need for local preference policies, and in the meantime express our concerns to the federal government over the potential loss of this power?
A large part of the rationale for engaging in all of these different free trade agreements is to reduce our reliance on trade with the United States. We need to broaden our trade with other countries. We are doing so. We are consulting. We did meet with the NWT Association of Communities and presented to them the discussions we were having on CETA. As part of the development of a new economic strategy, we will make sure that we seek all input.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
