SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Chandra Arya

  • Member of Parliament
  • Member of Parliament
  • Liberal
  • Nepean
  • Ontario
  • Voting Attendance: 67%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $104,578.46

  • Government Page
  • Apr/30/24 11:14:32 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague has covered many important points that are in the budget. I would like to ask him to comment on the things that this budget would do to spur the economic growth of Canada and how this budget would provide investments in advanced manufacturing and advanced technologies, like artificial intelligence, so that Canada continues to be ready for the new knowledge-based economy that is happening in the world today.
74 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/1/23 11:00:28 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, today is World AIDS Day. This is a global moment to unite people in the fight against HIV and AIDS. World AIDS Day exists to shine a light on the real experiences of people living with HIV today, while celebrating the strength, resilience and diversity of the communities most affected. It is a moment to inspire the leadership needed to create a future where HIV does not stand in the way of anyone's life. I am glad Canada is investing in global health, including funding for AIDS and education, and has other important global investments. Investments in the global fund and working with grassroots communities through organizations like One Canada are foundational to ending AIDS. Canada has made a 10-year commitment to increase funding for sexually transmitted disease control, including HIV and AIDS.
137 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/26/23 4:39:09 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-34 
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is exactly right. The 15 trade agreements we have signed with 51 countries, covering 61% of the world's GDP, show the world that Canada is an attractive place for foreign investment. We want to attract foreign investments that are strategic, that promote innovation and that provide high-quality jobs in Canada. We are always open to that. However, this particular bill focuses on investments that affect national security.
74 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/26/23 4:37:01 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-34 
Mr. Speaker, we have been very clear that any investment that promotes innovation in Canada is always welcome. A question will only come up if that innovation affects national security. If there are any speculative investments, like the purchase of agricultural land just for the sake of holding it, they too should be looked into. At the end of the day, the ownership of limited and productive resources does constitute a national security threat.
74 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/26/23 4:35:39 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-34 
Mr. Speaker, national security issues due to investments made by certain state-owned enterprises were always a concern. In fact, I think we have gone back and re-reviewed some of the decisions made to allow foreign investments by state-owned enterprises. My view is that this bill is comprehensive enough to take care of the national security review of any investment made by any foreign entity.
67 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/26/23 4:25:03 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-34 
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on Bill C-34, an act to modernize the national security provisions of the Investment Canada Act. We have been clear that we will always welcome foreign investments and trade that encourages economic growth, innovation and employment opportunities in Canada. At the same time, we know that economic security is national security. That is why this bill, which will amend the Investment Canada Act, would bring forward improvements so our government can act more quickly when required. This legislation would represent the most significant update of the ICA since 2009 and would ensure that we could address changing threats that can arise from foreign investment. While our government continues to welcome foreign direct investment, we are modernizing the ICA framework to ensure Canada’s continued prosperity while acting decisively when investments threaten our national security. Let me first appreciate the fundamental importance of foreign investments to our economy. Canada has a long history of welcoming foreign capital, businesses and expertise, and this openness has played a pivotal role in shaping our nation's growth. Foreign investments are a driving force behind economic development in Canada. They fuel innovation, stimulate job creation and enhance our global competitiveness. Foreign direct investment has enabled us to harness the expertise and resources of international partners, thereby propelling our own industries forward. These investments result in the creation of well-paying jobs for Canadians and help diversify our economic landscape. Moreover, they facilitate the transfer of knowledge and best practices, fostering innovation and productivity enhancements. While the economic benefits of foreign investment are undeniable, we must not overlook the critical dimensions of national security. Protecting our sovereignty, infrastructure and sensitive data is paramount. National security is not a matter of choice. It is an unwavering obligation of the government to safeguard the interests and well-being of its citizens. Over the years, the interconnectedness of our world has increased exponentially. Technology and the flow of capital have become global, creating unprecedented opportunities but also potential vulnerabilities. We cannot afford to be complacent when it comes to the protection of our national interests. While our commitment to an open and welcoming environment for foreign investors remains steadfast, it must coexist with a thorough evaluation of the national security implications that each investment brings with it. As I said earlier, we welcome foreign investments and trade that encourages economic growth, innovation and employment opportunities in Canada. At the same time, we know that economic security is national security. In my speech during second reading, I had mentioned the importance of economic security. I would like to touch on that again. The importance of economic security in the context of foreign direct investments cannot be overstated. In the pursuit of economic growth, it is essential that we safeguard against any potential threats to our long-term economic security. The economic security part primarily concerns the stability and growth of our economy, while the national security part pertains to safeguarding our sovereignty and protection from external threats. Foreign direct investment is a powerful tool for economic growth, but it must be leveraged in a way that ensures that all sectors of our economy continue to thrive. The steel and aluminum industries in Canada, which are 100% foreign-owned, serve as a compelling example of how a failure to address economic security can potentially result in stagnation and even decline. These industries, dominated by foreign ownership, have seen little to no growth in production capacity over the past two decades. While the rest of the world is expanding its aluminum and steel sectors, Canada's lack of growth and diversification in these areas has hindered our ability to tap into new markets and fully leverage our numerous free trade agreements. In fact, there are hardly any exports from the Canadian steel and aluminum industries outside of North America, even though we have signed 15 free trade agreements with 51 different countries that cover 61% of global GDP. There is a need for a comprehensive approach to foreign investment that addresses not only national security but also the economic well-being of our nation. We must find a balance that encourages investment while ensuring that the growth and diversification of our economic sectors continue to contribute to our long-term economic security. To strike a balance between these economic requirements and national security requirements, we have adopted a comprehensive and multi-dimensional approach to foreign investments. The approach is rooted in a principled and fact-based assessment of each investment proposal. The key elements of our approach include legislation and regulations, a national security review process, risk assessment, proportionate responses, consultation and transparency. There are certain principles that guide our approach to foreign investments and national security. The first is sovereignty and security. Canada's sovereignty and national security are not negotiable. The government is committed to safeguarding the country's interests and ensuring that foreign investments do not compromise its security. The second is openness and partnership. Canada remains open to foreign investments that enhance economic growth and job opportunities. We value international partnerships and the mutual benefits they bring. The third is transparency and accountability. Our approach is characterized by transparency, accountability and due process. Decisions are made based on facts, expert advice and consultation with relevant parties. The fourth is proportional response. The response to national security risks is proportionate to the level of risk identified. This ensures that legitimate and beneficial investments are not unfairly restricted. The fifth is continual adaptation. Our approach is not static. It evolves to address new and emerging challenges. The government remains committed to staying ahead of evolving threats and opportunities. With this act, we are highlighting that Canada's approach to foreign investments strikes a delicate balance between economic growth and national security. We remain committed to welcoming foreign capital and expertise that contribute to our prosperity, innovation and employment opportunities. However, this commitment is tempered by an unwavering dedication to safeguarding our sovereignty and national security. The Investment Canada Act, the national security review process and the guiding principles that underlie our approach provide a robust framework to evaluate foreign investments. Through consultation, transparency and a proportional response to identified risks, we ensure that legitimate investments are not discouraged and national security is upheld. In this era of interconnectedness, Canada's approach is not a mere policy. It is a reflection of our values, our commitment to our citizens and our vision for a prosperous and secure future. We embrace the world while safeguarding our national interests, and in doing so, we strengthen the very foundations of our great nation. The ICA provides for both the net benefit and national security reviews of foreign investments into Canada. It was established to provide investor certainty while reserving Canada's ability to block individual investments under specific circumstances. The act is designed to encourage investment, economic growth and employment, only interceding when an investment is not of net benefit to Canada or would harm national security.
1172 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/26/23 4:19:52 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-34 
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the amendment to bring the threshold to zero dollars with respect to state-owned enterprises. I would like to ask my hon. colleague's opinion about the investments done by multinational companies where they come and capture an entire sector, as it is today with the steel and aluminum sector being entirely foreign owned. They just become the branch office of the foreign multinationals, focusing only on the North American markets, and never attempting to export the talent, resources and expertise that is available in Canada to the countries with which we have free trade agreements across the world. Does that not also fit into the definition of economic security which, in my view, is the same as national security?
124 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/6/23 12:51:05 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, our budget has made it very clear that the investments we are going to make will be in companies that lead to the clean economy of the future. That has been made very clear and we will continue to stand by it.
44 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/29/23 2:00:07 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, Indo-Pacific region is growing in terms of population and economy. It is also a strategically important region in the current turbulent global situation. The region offers much-needed markets for Canadian exports and a secure place for Canadian investments. Canada has a well-formulated Indo-Pacific strategy. Among other things, this highlights the importance of our relationship with India. India is a growing market for our exports, with pulses today and potential products like small nuclear modular reactors in the future. India is also a secure place for our increasing need to diversify our investments. Our pension funds and the private sector have already invested $84 billion there. India is also the leading source of our much-needed skilled immigrants and a major provider of international students.
130 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/23 10:43:39 a.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, this budget builds on the actions taken over the years to support vulnerable Canadians. It also builds on such actions as investing $1.2 billion into artificial intelligence, quantum computing, other advanced technologies and the critical minerals strategy, which was strengthened by the critical minerals infrastructure fund last year. In this budget, we have invested $1.2 billion into space technologies. What is the hon. member's reaction or opinion on the investments the current budget is making into the technologies of tomorrow so that we can secure a place at the forefront of the advanced technologies in the world?
102 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/18/23 1:02:02 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, let us take the way I personally look at the deficit of $43 billion. For me, as a working Canadian, I do not like credit card loans. However, I do like having a mortgage because it helps me to invest in my long-term future and long-term assets. The deficit we have is basically going towards long-term investments required for Canada so that we can continue to be competitive in this world, improve our long-term transportation network and invest in long-term things required for clean energy growth. Those are the kinds of long-term infrastructure-related investments that are required, and these things are primarily contributing to the deficit we have today.
118 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/3/23 1:27:22 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-34 
Madam Speaker, in addition to the economic security issues I discussed, my colleagues brought forward others earlier in debate, like the purchase of intangible assets other than the company itself, and some issues that were brought forward by the member from Windsor on the lack of competition resulting in foreign direct investments. These are the kinds of things that need to be considered now. We know this act has not been looked at in, I think, the last 13 years. This is the first opportunity we have and we need to use this opportunity to consider all aspects that are directly related.
102 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/3/23 1:16:46 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-34 
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time. I am pleased to speak to Bill C-34, an act to amend the Investment Canada Act. Canada has a long-standing reputation for welcoming foreign investments and a strong framework to promote trade while advancing Canadian interests. In fact, Canada has one of the earliest and most robust screening processes for foreign investments in the world. The Investment Canada Act was enacted 38 years ago, in 1985, to encourage investment in Canada that contributes to economic growth and employment opportunities. The act allowed the government to review significant foreign investments to ensure these benefits exist. The act was updated in 2009 to include a framework for national security review of foreign direct investments. Bill C-34 would implement a set of amendments to improve the national security review process of foreign investments and modernize the ICA. Collectively, these amendments represent the most significant legislative update of the ICA since 2009. These amendments would also ensure that Canada’s review process is consistent with our allies'. However, in my view, there is another issue in foreign direct investment that should be looked into, and that is dealing with economic security. I believe this is not only an opportunity but also a necessity that we deal with foreign direct investment that results in economic stagnation of any sector of our economy, thus affecting our long-term economic security. Let me explain this by first quoting a couple of sentences from the backgrounder that was published, which states, “The Act is designed to encourage investment, economic growth and employment”. The backgrounder also states, “The Government of Canada has committed to promoting economic security and combatting foreign interference by modernizing the ICA to strengthen the national security review process and better mitigate economic security threats arising from foreign investment.” For me, the keywords are “economic security”. There is no mention of the words “economic security” in the bill tabled by the government that we are debating today. Probably the thought is that “economic security” and “national security” are considered as synonyms. I will now explain the importance of economic security. Canada is growing. Our population is growing. Our economy and GDP are growing, and we need our economic sectors to grow and contribute to economic growth and employment. If any economic or industrial sector does not grow and does not contribute to economic growth due to foreign direct investment, then in my view this is a threat to economic security. Any stagnation or complete lack of economic growth in a growing economy will directly affect our economic security in the medium to long term. I will give two examples where foreign direct investment in Canada has resulted in stagnation of economic growth, which in turn is a threat to our economic security. The two industrial sectors that are prime examples of this are the steel and aluminum industries in Canada. All steel and aluminum sector companies in Canada are foreign-owned. Due to our encouragement of foreign direct investment, today both of these sectors, with 100% foreign ownership, have been reduced to a branch office of multinational companies that are dominating aluminum and steel industry worldwide. Due to this 100% foreign ownership, there has been no increase in production capacity in both of these sectors in Canada for the last 20 years. During the last 20 years, aluminum production has basically stagnated at about three million tonnes. While many new aluminum smelters are being set up in China and other countries, the installed capacity of the aluminum sector in Canada has stagnated. It is the same with the steel industry. During the last 20 years, the installed capacity has basically stagnated at about 15 million tonnes. Not only is there no growth in the production capacity of steel and aluminum, but due to 100% foreign ownership, Canada’s steel and aluminum exports are limited just to the U.S. and Mexico. There are hardly any Canadian steel and aluminum exports to Europe or the growing markets in Asia. Canada has signed numerous free trade agreements across the world. We have free trade agreements with Europe and Asia-Pacific countries. In total, we have free trade agreements with over 50 countries, but has the aluminum and steel sectors taken advantage of these free trade agreements to increase Canadian exports? The answer is absolutely no. Therefore, my question is this: If our welcoming foreign direct investment leads to 100% foreign ownership in any entire industrial sector and this results in growth stagnation of that sector, is it not a threat to our long-term economic security? If 100% foreign ownership prevents Canadian industry from taking advantage of our natural resources and our expertise to export Canadian goods across the world, is this not a threat to our long-term economic security? We need all sectors in our industry to add value to our natural resources and contribute to Canada's economic growth by increasing their capacity to produce. We need all economic sectors to build on our many decades of knowledge and expertise to contribute to Canada's economic growth by increasing Canadian exports across the world. I again state that if any economic or industrial sector does not grow and does not contribute to economic growth due to foreign direct investment, then in my view this is a threat to economic security. Also, any stagnation or complete lack of economic growth in a growing economy will directly affect our economic security in the medium to long term. I call upon the House to take this opportunity to address this shortcoming in the Investment Canada Act. Other than that, I completely agree with everything else that has been proposed in the bill. There was a need to update and streamline the administrative process in light of a shifting geopolitical environment and a need for alignment with international allies and for better coordination efforts with allies. The world looks a lot different now than in 2009 when the act was last amended. The global market has rapidly changed with shifting geopolitical threats. Canada's interactions with the rest of the world are changing. The government has seen a rise in state-sponsored threat activities from hostile state and non-state actors. They are attracted by Canada's technologically advanced and open economy and world-class research community. The level of sophistication of these threats has also increased. Hostile state and non-state actors are deliberately pursuing strategies to acquire goods, technologies and intellectual property through foreign investments that will damage Canada's economy and undermine national security while controlling the supply chain of critical goods. In fact, Canada has one of the earliest and most robust screening processes for foreign investments in the world. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated this threat by creating vulnerabilities that could lead to opportunistic, harmful investment behaviour by foreign investors. They are looking to buy up vulnerable Canadian businesses. In response, the government has taken swift, concrete action to enhance scrutiny on inbound investments related to public health and critical goods and services. The government again took action recently by enhancing scrutiny of investments involved in sensitive goods and technology, such as critical minerals, critical infrastructure and sensitive personal data. Through these amendments, the government is prepared to once again take action to strengthen the national security review while still allowing for positive foreign investments. Economic-based threats to national security are of increasing concern not just for Canada but for our allies as well.
1267 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/8/22 10:02:48 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-19 
Madam Speaker, absolutely, if the member had taken some time to read the budget, there is a whole chapter on this. As I mentioned, there are many investments on many different levels that deal with the defence of our country and the security aspects of our country. Every single one of these things has been derived from the budget.
59 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 12:42:44 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, the energy industry is critical to every single country, and we have an advantage here in Canada to produce ethical energy. As I said, energy security is becoming important to every country in the world. We need to make sure that our investments in all aspects of the energy industry, whether in natural gas or in minerals for batteries, etc., are encouraged and promoting investments to come.
69 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 12:30:29 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Fleetwood—Port Kells. I would like to focus my talk on the following important items in the budget. The first is Canada's critical minerals and clean industrial strategies. In my view, this is, at the same time, the biggest opportunity and the most critical need for Canada today. Daniel Yergin is an economic historian and writer about whom Time magazine said, “If there's one man whose opinion matters more than any other on global energy markets, it's Daniel Yergin.” Mr. Yergin said in his latest book, “You're creating whole new supply chains that don't exist, and you're trying to do it in a very fast time. That means transitioning from Big Oil to Big Shovel.” The second is launching a world-leading Canada growth fund with $15 billion, which will help attract $45 billion in private capital. We need to transform our economy at speed and at scale. The third is creating a Canadian innovation and investment agency, a market-oriented agency, one with private sector leadership and expertise similar to those that have helped countries like Finland and Israel transform themselves into global innovation leaders. The fourth is the review of tax support to R and D. The decades-old scientific research and experimental development program has been a cornerstone of Canada's innovation strategy, which provides tax incentives to encourage Canadian businesses of all sizes in all sectors to conduct R and D. The fifth is cutting taxes for Canada's growing small businesses, enabling more small businesses to avail themselves of the reduced federal tax rate of 9% compared to the general federal corporate tax of 15%. The sixth is supporting Canada's innovation clusters for innovation ecosystems for plant-based protein alternatives, ocean-based industries, advanced manufacturing, digital technologies and artificial intelligence. Before I speak on these six items, I would like to recognize this budget as prudent and fiscally responsible. My personal political ideology is at the centre of the political spectrum, and for me being fiscally responsible is very important. I notice that our fiscal anchor, the debt-to-GDP ratio, is expected to fall to 45.1% this year, and go down to 41.5% by 2026-27, closer to the prepandemic levels. We need to go in this direction so that we have the same fiscal strength if we get hit by another disaster like the current pandemic. Related to this is the composition of our borrowing. We had very low interest rates for a long period of time, and now they have started to trend upward. When the rates were low, our government locked in these interest rates with increasing the size of our long-term borrowing. In the decade prior to the pandemic, on average, about 20% of the bonds issued by the government were issued at maturities of 10 years or greater. Over the course of the last year, the federal government allocation of long-term bonds was about 45%, which is a good thing. The third general observation about this budget is what I have been asking for a couple of years. I have been asking that we launch a comprehensive review of government programs. Some of the programs have been around for many years, and some were introduced in recent times as part of our urgent need to fight the pandemic. We need to evaluate if the programs are delivering what they were intended for. We need to know whether the objectives or the end results are still relevant and/or effective use of taxpayers' dollars. I have said that we need to repurpose or reallocate resources to programs that contribute to quality economic development. I am glad the budget announced the launch of a comprehensive strategic policy review to assess program effectiveness and to identify opportunities to save and reallocate resources to adapt government programs and operations to a new postpandemic reality. Last, the budget dealt with housing, immigration, skills and child care. Yes, these are social policies, but what is just as important is that they are economic policies, too. I entered politics with three objectives. My first objective was affordable housing for all who need it. I am happy to note that the budget builds on the national housing strategy and addresses both affordable housing and housing affordability. Now, I move on to development of critical minerals. As I said earlier, a big opportunity for Canada, and at the same time a critical necessity for Canada today, is developing and implementing critical minerals and clean industrial strategies. The global energy market is worth $10 trillion, and it is undergoing tremendous change. Many significant geopolitical events during the past 100 years were due to energy market considerations, so much so that some have said many countries' foreign policies are totally based on their energy policies. Now, another dimension has been added. What was behind the scenes is now in the front. Energy is a national security issue for all countries. It is both an opportunity and a necessity for Canada to focus on the energy industry. The nature of the energy industry is changing. The transportation sector is going from gasoline-powered vehicles to battery-operated vehicles. Renewable energy sources, such as wind energy and solar energy, are not only becoming financially feasible on their own, but can enhance their standing with battery energy storage systems. Right now, the battery industry is dominated by China. To secure continued availability of batteries in a future battery-dominated world, we need to have our own supply of batteries manufactured in Canada. We have one strong advantage that many countries do not have: We have the critical minerals required to manufacture batteries. Critical minerals are also central to major global industries such as green technology, health care, aerospace and computing. They are used in our phones, our computers and even our cars. Critical minerals are already essential to the global economy and will be in even greater demand in the years to come. We are talking about nickel, lithium, cobalt, graphite, copper, rare earth elements, vanadium, tellurium, gallium, scandium, titanium, magnesium, zinc, the platinum group of metals and uranium. Canada has an abundance of these valuable critical minerals, but we need to make significant investments to make the most of these resources. A thousand-pound electric battery requires about 500,000 pounds of earth to be moved. As Daniel Yergin said, “You're creating whole new supply chains that don't exist, and you're trying to do it in a very fast time. That means transitioning from Big Oil to Big Shovel.” In Canada, we have knowledge, expertise and a long track record of financing and developing mineral projects. We are indeed the world leaders, but we need to move fast now. We need to support the industry with incentives, which this budget proposes. More importantly, we should make the critical minerals regulation process simpler so companies seeking to invest look for a balanced and predictable regulatory environment and a collaborative approach among different orders of government. I am glad that the budget would make important investments in improving our regulatory processes. I will touch on just one other aspect: the Canadian innovation and investment agency. Let us face the bitter truth about innovation in Canada. Our main innovation challenges are the low rate of private business investment in research and development, and the uptake of new technologies. These are key requirements for our knowledge-based quality economic growth and for creating very good-quality jobs. This agency is being modelled similar to those that have helped Finland and Israel transform themselves into global innovation leaders. I look forward to hearing the questions.
1301 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border