International Trade Committee on Nov. 23rd, 2023

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I'll cede my time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Sidhu, go ahead, please.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for joining us here today.

Mr. Roy, you mentioned the pork industry stands to benefit from this trade agreement with Ukraine. You spoke about markets that you used to have in Russia and the importance of finding additional markets, such as the 80 countries around the world your members currently ship to.

Perhaps you could speak about how your members are increasing trade with Ukraine, so members on this committee can understand why trade with Ukraine is important to you and your members.

[René Roy]

Yes.

The pork industry relies on a large number of trade partners or countries. There are some that are more important than others, such as the U.S. China has also been an important trade partner for a period of time.

When it reverts its position, our processors will have to look for other markets quite quickly. Every option we open helps us be more resilient in the face of markets that are closing for whatever reason. Ukraine would be an additional opportunity for our exporters. We have seen a slight increase in the EU lately, but we know it's very hard to enter into the EU because of non-tariff trade barriers. We find it very unfortunate. If trade deals are signed, they should be respected in such a way that we can trade between the two countries. We know that's not the case right now with the EU.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you for that.

What I understand is that your members are looking forward to doing more trade with Ukraine through agreements like this, so I think that's important for members to understand.

I'm going to turn to Mr. Soule on the labour side. Our government recently introduced legislation to ban replacement workers in federally regulated sectors. The Harper Conservatives, on the other hand, repeatedly introduced anti-union legislation. How do you feel that the federal government can best engage with labour on macroeconomic issues broadly, and more specifically on trade issues?

[George Soule]

Thank you for the question.

As I was saying, obviously, anything we can do to help improve the conditions for workers here in Canada or around the world is important. I outlined some of those ways we can do that within the trade agreement. Of course, if we can tweak anti-scab legislation a little bit to fix some of the things I think need to be improved within that legislation, like getting rid of an 18-month waiting period, for instance, and closing some of the loopholes, which I think remain still, that allow for some replacement workers, then, by all means, that is one way the government can ensure we're supporting workers—absolutely.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you for those insights.

We've known for a decade that the Harper Conservatives took a binary approach to trade agreements, where labour rights were always sacrificed. I don't believe labour unions are anti-trade, but of course they want comprehensive and progressive trade deals that work for workers. Can you expand on how labour's view of trade deals has evolved over the course of many years, and why including labour rights in trade agreements isn't as woke as the opposition claims, but is a common-sense approach to encouraging trade in the 21st century?

[George Soule]

Sure. I would say, again, to be clear, that we're actually not opposed to this trade deal. We have concerns, as I said, with the ISDS provisions in it, and I think those should be removed. However, overall, trade is an important part of building an economy and creating jobs, of course. On steelworkers, for instance, and talking about steel, which is something we do trade with Ukraine, the fact that we have some of the lowest carbon-emitting steel in the world is something that our members are very proud of. The promotion and the ability for us to trade that on a global scale is what ensures the longevity of our industry and of those jobs here in Canada.

Trade's an important part of how Canada can grow, and obviously we can create and support jobs.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you for that.

Since you mentioned steel production and the importance of green steel, as you know, our government has made historic investments in the steel sector, including at the Dofasco plant in Hamilton and the Algoma plant in Sault Ste. Marie. I want to know why the sector is pivoting towards green steel production. Do you believe reducing carbon emissions is important for Canada, and even for Ukraine, to remain economically competitive in the 21st century?

[George Soule]

It's the trade advantage that we're able to deliver, again, by having some of the lowest-emitting steel, aluminum and cement in the world. It's something we are very proud of and that our members are very proud to produce. I think Canada should promote that more.

I think the greening of steel is something we have to be somewhat aware of and careful of sometimes. Some of those changes, particularly, for example, in Sault Ste. Marie, were maybe done a little bit quickly and without proper consultation with workers, and that is something we need to make sure we do when moving ahead with any of these changes.

Of course, we are supportive of the overall principle of sustainable jobs moving forward and ensuring that we can continue to lower our emissions, while supporting workers and creating jobs in this country. However, that work has to be done in consultation, and actually by ensuring that it's not just consultation but having workers at the table, in order to make sure those jobs are truly protected and created going forward, and they're not just talked about in these deals so that in the end we actually lose workers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We go on to Mr. Savard-Tremblay, please, for six minutes.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Soule, I want to make sure I understand your position: do you support the agreement?

[George Soule]

Yes, absolutely.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

You pointed out the progress that has been made. Of course, we are no longer in the throes of rampant neo-liberalism. We now include chapters on the environment, workers' rights and other social considerations. That said, we are still a long way from truly binding provisions. There is a chapter on corporate responsibility, of which the government is very proud, but there do not seem to be any binding mechanisms, other than corporate responsibility.

What could we add to that?

[George Soule]

I am sorry, but I will answer in English, because this is a subject I do not speak about often in one of the two official languages.

I will say that, yes, I know there has been some movement and some talk around mandatory human rights and environment actions, and steelworkers support those as well. The Steelworkers Humanity Fund is part of the Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability and has done a lot of work on that front.

However, in that work in some of the legislation we've seen passed recently, as well as in this agreement, far too often the only accountability to the employer or any corporation is voluntary. As you said, there are no teeth whatsoever in these agreements and that means there is no accountability and it means that it probably won't actually be followed through upon, and that is a problem for us.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

What more would you like to see to remedy the situation, to have something with more teeth?

[George Soule]

There are plenty of examples around the world of making human rights and due diligence mandatory. When you see things like “voluntary” within these situations, or you see simple reporting rather than actual accountability and a process for workers or those who are hurt in whatever way possible through some kind of legal process to actually hold the corporations to account, in the absence of that, unfortunately it's just words and there is no actual accountability.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Do you think that Canadian laws do enough in terms of due diligence?

[George Soule]

The current laws aren't enough. In fact, on the international level we think that in Canada, for instance, in the recent law that came out of the Senate and was passed through the House, it should have been stronger. Again, rather than simply asking for reporting, it should actually require action and some level of accountability.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

In the last federal budget, there was a line indicating that there would be legislation by the end of 2023 on forced labour in supply chains. We are still waiting and there is only one month left in the year. Are you putting pressure on the government to meet its commitment by the end of the year?

[George Soule]

Absolutely.

In fact I sit on the steering committee as a representative for the Steelworkers Humanity Fund to talk about just that. Again, the law that came through the Senate is about reporting and it's voluntary. It does not include any of those penalties and that accountability that I was talking about, so it would be nice to see that.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Absolutely. An NDP bill, which I co‑sponsor as a Bloc member, goes much further in terms of due diligence. It's not being given priority at this point. Would you like to see it debated in the House?

[George Soule]

That has been our call. We would love to see it get pushed and the government could pick up these bills and make them happen quickly. That would be great.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Let's talk about investor-state dispute settlements. You support the agreement. The Bloc's position is to vote in favour of the agreement. However, I intend to vote against the clause in the bill that deals with that aspect. Do you agree with this position?

[George Soule]

I'd like to see the ISDS removed from this agreement.