That would be great.
Hi, everybody. My name is Wynne Hartviksen and I am the communications and political action director for UNITE HERE Canada. Our union represents 50,000 workers across Canada and a wide range of industries. Our members work in hotels and restaurants and social service agencies and in autoparts plants. For the past century, we have represented Canadian garment workers. It's those workers in that industry we want to talk to you about today.
At the beginning of 2002, tariffs began to be lifted on many categories of apparel and textile products from China.
On January 1, 2005, all WTO-sanctioned quotas on apparel imports from China were also removed. Since that time, there has been a severe market disruption in the Canadian apparel industry, with imports from China rising in some product categories by a shocking 200%. Following the elimination of the decades-old apparel-quota system, many countries, most notably the United States and the European Union, moved to impose time-limited restrictions on the growth of specific apparel imports into their domestic markets, as allowed for under article 242 of China's WTO accession agreement. These restrictions, which are known as safeguards, allow countries to cap the growth of imports from China in specific apparel categories to 7.5% each year, from the past year until the end of the calendar year 2008.
This combination of events--the lifting of the quotas in 2005, and the fact that the U.S. and the EU both moved to implement safeguards--has left the Canadian domestic apparel market even more vulnerable to surging imports from China, the global leader in apparel production. As the EU and the U.S. safeguard measures reduced the flow of Chinese exports to the world's two largest markets, ours has been accessed more readily to fill the void.
The effects on jobs and the industry has been dramatic. As Bob Kirke, executive director of the Canadian Apparel Federation, said in Business Edge newsmagazine on November 24 of this year, the elimination of tariffs and quotas on imported clothing “was the perfect storm” for our industry.
While a number of apparel companies have been able to move from manufacturing to importing to survive, the people who work in this industry--the sewing machine operators, the cutters, and the finishers we represent--have not been so lucky. Since January 2002, more jobs have been lost--approximately 50,000--than remain today. As of January 2006, there were just over 48,000 jobs left in the apparel industry, according to Statistics Canada. The impact has been felt particularly in Quebec, which I understand you'll be speaking of more next week.
Though nothing has prohibited our country from using the same WTO-sanctioned safeguard measures that the EU and the U.S. used, the previous Canadian government chose not to act to negotiate safeguards. So in July 2005, our union, UNITE HERE, joined three garment workers, including Radika Quansoon, who is here with us today, and launched a complaint to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal, asking for an inquiry into the market disruption and the recommendation for the imposition of safeguards in eight specific categories. The CITT took almost 15 months to decide that Radika, though clearly meeting the dictionary definition of a producer, did not qualify to launch a complaint to the tribunal as a producer.
Unfortunately, during that time, the Canadian government did not act to negotiate safeguards, deferring to the CITT. In that time, more factories have closed, more jobs were lost, and more families and communities have been torn apart. We chose to submit our CITT complaint as workers in the industry, because we believe workers should have a say in the trade relations and regulations that so clearly impact their livelihood. Additionally, we were supported by a number of Canadian manufacturers and well-known producers.
It has been said only 1% of the industry wanted the Canadian government to implement safeguards. We disagree with that statement based on the pure numbers. We need to take a different look at this issue and ask ourselves how many workers and jobs are represented by the manufacturers who we know support the negotiation of safeguards.
The apparel industry is complex. Many of the thousands of establishments in this sector are very small. It's estimated that at least a quarter of them employ fewer than five people.
Many of the manufacturers in this industry are also importers, or they are producers in other countries, including China, who then import products back into Canada. Attempting to ascertain the support of this industry for one policy or another is difficult just because of the sheer size and the fragmentation of the operations.
But many companies are also understandably torn between their desire to protect their Canadian workers' jobs and operations and their need to compete in the Canadian marketplace, which is now free of any protection and in fact encourages importing from other countries over maintaining jobs at home.
We know, though, even with these factors, that many larger leading manufacturers supported our complaint to the CITT, signing postcards, sending letters, and in some cases also sending letters to the former Prime Minister asking the Canadian government to negotiate safeguards.
I have with me today letters and postcards from about 30 apparel manufacturers who as of January of this year, we estimate, represent probably just under 10% of the apparel workforce in Canada.
More powerful, though, than just the numbers are the words of Canadian manufacturers. Along with the aforementioned letters to the former Prime Minister, I've also brought with me today—and I understand this is available for circulation—a letter from Kash Sood, who is the president and CEO of the Ranka Group.
I should make it clear, we don't actually represent the workers who produce for the Ranka Group. Kash Sood contacted us after hearing about our complaint to the CITT, wanting to sign on and support the campaign.
In his letter of December 5 of this year to the members of this committee, Mr. Sood clearly states his support for safeguards. I quote:
Although a portion of our business is imports, we have prided ourselves on the fact that Ranka Enterprise Inc. is and continues to be a Canadian Manufacturer, which provides jobs to Canadians. We make a variety of apparel products, from women's clothing to hats and accessories and sell to well known retail stores, across North America, like the Bay, Zellers, Sears, Wal-Mart, Disney, Marshal Field and JC Penny.
Five years ago, our company employed in excess of 600 people; today the number is about 160 people. If the current surging imports from China continue, unchecked, the number of people we can employ will likely be further reduced.
Short notice of the Committee's intent makes it impossible for me to testify in person. But we want you and the other members of the Committee to know that, as a Canadian Apparel Manufacturer, we fully support the Canadian government implementing safeguard measures with China.
He finishes his letter with:
We urge the Government of Canada to take steps to address the competitive disadvantage Canadian clothing manufacturers face and we ask your committee to encourage the government to negotiate a safeguard agreement with China without delay.
Even those companies that have made the move to producing outside the country acknowledge the devastating effect of the regulatory changes on the Canadian market. From the same Business Edge news magazine of November of this year about the elimination of tariffs and quotas, I quote: It “had a disastrous effect on Canadian jobs and manufacturing,” says Gary Steiman, president and chief operating officer of Winnipeg's Gemini Fashion of Canada Ltd., one of hundreds of Canadian companies that closed their manufacturing plants in Canada.
Currently, Gemini Fashion, which operates out of Winnipeg and used to employ 450 workers just a few years ago, now employs only 150 people and is operating as an import-only business.
With all these facts, we've been left to wonder why. Why is the new Canadian government not acting to stand up for Canadian jobs? Why has the government not moved to utilize the same WTO-sanctioned safeguard measures as the U.S., the EU, Brazil, Turkey, and--just in September of this year--South Africa have all used to protect their domestic industry and their local jobs? Why is one of the bedrock manufacturing industries in this country not allowed the same chances as its counterparts in most of the developed world?
We're not asking for a radical set of protection methods. While a discussion of things like labour and human rights in China is certainly valid and important, it's not the foundation of our argument. Currently, as Kash Sood said in his letter, Canadian manufacturers face a competitive disadvantage. Workers in this industry like Radika are the ones paying the price for this competitive disadvantage and simply want their government to utilize the same measures—safeguards—as many of our major trading partners have already used.
We would like to thank the committee for giving us this opportunity to speak to it today.
