This is a single
speech (house debate) resource
from the openparliament.ca API. If you’re new here, you might want to look at the documentation. If API and JSON are gibberish to you, you’re better off at our main site.
This is a single
speech (house debate) resource
from the openparliament.ca API. If you’re new here, you might want to look at the documentation. If API and JSON are gibberish to you, you’re better off at our main site.
{
"time": "2006-09-25 12:55:00",
"attribution": {
"en": "Hon. Dominic LeBlanc",
"fr": ""
},
"content": {
"en": "<p data-HoCid=\"59462\" data-originallang=\"en\">Mr. Speaker, the member for Cariboo\u2014Prince George said that the previous Liberal government had not accepted a deal and he is right. We declined a deal that was considerably better than the one that the government has now imposed on the softwood lumber industry.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"59463\" data-originallang=\"en\">There were two main things that the previous Liberal government would not accept. We would not accept to reward the American lumber coalition with a half billion dollar Canadian tip for having harassed our lumber industry. That for the previous Liberal government was an unacceptable concession, one that this government quickly made.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"59464\" data-originallang=\"en\">The other thing which the previous Liberal government had refused to accept was a termination clause that would allow, contrary to what many have claimed, a quick exit from the agreement. As the Quebec industry spokespersons have said, it is an awfully high price to pay, a billion for effectively two years of managed trade.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"59465\" data-originallang=\"en\">Those are the things the previous Liberal government would never have accepted and that is why we declined a deal that in fact was better than this one.</p>",
"fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"59462\" data-originallang=\"en\">Monsieur le Pr\u00e9sident, le d\u00e9put\u00e9 de Cariboo\u2014Prince George a dit que le pr\u00e9c\u00e9dent gouvernement lib\u00e9ral avait rejet\u00e9 une entente, et il a raison. Nous avons rejet\u00e9 une entente qui \u00e9tait consid\u00e9rablement meilleure que celle que le gouvernement impose maintenant \u00e0 l'industrie du bois d'oeuvre.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"59463\" data-originallang=\"en\">Il y avait essentiellement deux choses que le gouvernement lib\u00e9ral ne voulait pas accepter. D'abord, il \u00e9tait hors de question de faire un cadeau d'un demi-milliard de dollars \u00e0 la coalition am\u00e9ricaine du bois d'oeuvre pour s'\u00eatre rendue coupable de harc\u00e8lement aupr\u00e8s de notre industrie. C'\u00e9tait une concession inacceptable pour le gouvernement lib\u00e9ral, mais le gouvernement actuel en est vite arriv\u00e9 l\u00e0.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"59464\" data-originallang=\"en\">L'autre chose que l'ancien gouvernement lib\u00e9ral avait refus\u00e9 d'accepter, contrairement \u00e0 ce que bien des gens ont pr\u00e9tendu, \u00e9tait une disposition d'extinction qui aurait permis de se retirer rapidement de l'entente. Comme les porte-parole de l'industrie l'ont dit au Qu\u00e9bec, un milliard pour deux ans de commerce administr\u00e9, c'est un prix terriblement \u00e9lev\u00e9 \u00e0 payer.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"59465\" data-originallang=\"en\">Le gouvernement lib\u00e9ral n'aurait jamais accept\u00e9 ces choses. Voil\u00e0 pourquoi nous avons rejet\u00e9 une entente qui, en r\u00e9alit\u00e9, \u00e9tait mieux que celle-ci.</p>"
},
"url": "/debates/2006/9/25/dominic-leblanc-3/",
"politician_url": "/politicians/dominic-leblanc/",
"politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/1314/",
"procedural": false,
"source_id": "1648571",
"h1": {
"en": "Government Orders",
"fr": ""
},
"h2": {
"en": "Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006",
"fr": ""
},
"document_url": "/debates/2006/9/25/",
"related": {
"document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2006%2F9%2F25%2F"
}
}