International Trade Committee on Feb. 4th, 2008

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you for the clarification.

I have just one last comment. I know we've heard everyone's overwhelming...when we look at the potential for business growth in Korea from different sectors, is there a consensus? Should we continue to pursue this versus what I'm hearing--if we go to the status quo that's not an option?

[Edouard Asnong]

The status quo is not an option.

[John Masswohl]

The options are that you move forward or you fall back, and right now the position we're in is that we're falling back versus the United States. We need to get the beef access restored, get the prohibition lifted, and we need to get the same terms of access as the U.S. If we have a 1% higher tariff than the U.S., I'd agree with what Martin said; we'll fall back.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Very well. Thank you.

It's five o'clock, but I only have one name on the speakers list, so why don't we conclude with Mr. Maloney.

[John Maloney, Liberal, Welland, ON]

Mr. Keyes, wine counterfeiting is a serious problem. Do you feel the judicial system in Korea will back you up, or will that be a non-tariff barrier?

[Robert J. Keyes]

I have considerable confidence in the intellectual property regime in Korea through my observations of Korea in a number of guises over the past number of years. I think if a problem should arise in Korea, there will be recourse there. From what our members tell us, and they are putting increasing amounts of product into Korea, they seem to have the confidence that the Korean legal system would come through. You never know until you have to test it, but I think people are confident they're not going to have the kinds of frustrations we're now experiencing in China, for example.

[John Maloney, Liberal, Welland, ON]

In the manufacturing sector the great angst, especially in the automotive sector, is non-tariff barriers. Do any of you feel that...certainly with canola probably not, because there is no competing market. Are there any concerns, perhaps even with pork, of non-tariff barriers that may thwart you?

[Martin Lavoie]

We had minor issues three or four years ago, but I'd say that in general for pork it's one of the easiest markets we've been dealing with on market access, on SPS, the sanitary and phytosanitary side. But that's just for pork. I understand it might be different in other sectors.

[John Maloney, Liberal, Welland, ON]

Mr. Masswohl.

[John Masswohl]

I think non-tariff barriers have become a fact of life. We expect they will occur. How do you respond to them? That's why one of the things we have asked for is to have a mechanism in this agreement to deal with these SPS problems when they come up.

I mentioned that the frustration we had with the Koreans was that we just couldn't get our CFIA officials to talk to them. If we have a mechanism that obligates them to work through these issues, that'll be something valuable. It's another reason why the Canada Beef Export Federation has a permanent office and permanent staff in Korea, to help deal with these issues as they come up.

As I say, you're right, it's a fact of life. You go into that with your eyes open and you try to have mechanisms to deal with them.

[John Maloney, Liberal, Welland, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Thank you, and I thank all of our members today for some great questions.

Before we close, I wanted to ask Mr. Keyes a question on the same topic. You raised in your submission this spectre of the counterfeit icewine in China. I'm curious. Are they counterfeit labels as well? Are they pretending that it's Canadian icewine?

[Robert J. Keyes]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

For goodness' sake. How do they spell it?

[Robert J. Keyes]

There are a variety of situations in China, and I'd be glad to discuss them with you and show you some very interesting photographs, complete with the spelling mistakes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Yes.

[Robert J. Keyes]

One of our members has spent upwards of $400,000 in legal fees trying to protect his interests. The photographs on the bottle: the back shows the Okanagan, we think; the map shows the north shore of Lake Erie; and the front shows a picture of his winery, with his name on it. And he has never put a bottle of his product into China.

[Martin Lavoie]

This is also an issue in the pork sector. We see a lot of this: products coming from South America in Canadian boxes, with mistakes on them. We even saw some Maple Leaf beef, although Maple Leaf has no beef processing. I think it's a reality for a lot of sectors in agriculture with the Chinese market.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Thank you.

I want to thank all of you again. There were excellent presentations. I'm sorry we didn't have more time with each of the questions. We will try to get our questions a little tighter next time around. Again, thank you very much for appearing and for the information you provided.

We'll take about a two-minute break here while the witnesses are leaving us. We'll resume with debate on the motion of Monsieur Cardin.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

We will resume debate.

The motion as amended thus far I'll read into the record in English. I think it's been circulated to everyone. That is the notice of motion by Mr. Serge Cardin, and it reads:

Given the seriousness of the crisis rocking the forestry and manufacturing sectors,

- that the Committee recommend that the government introduce as soon as possible an improved aid package for the forestry and manufacturing sectors, including trade measures to support these sectors; to consider the recommendations of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal, especially those regarding safeguards;

I thought we deleted that phrase?

[Michael Holden, Committee Researcher]

I thought so too.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Yes, I think we deleted “especially those regarding safeguards”.

It continues:

to bring Canada's trade laws into line with those of the United States and the European Union with respect to anti-dumping measures consistent with WTO guidelines; to carry out open and thorough studies on the impact of all ongoing trade negotiations on the manufacturing sector, and report the adoption of this motion to the House at the earliest opportunity.

Resuming debate, Mr. Bains, or is Mr. Maloney going first?

[John Maloney, Liberal, Welland, ON]

Perhaps I can speak to that, Mr. Chair.

I understand there's perhaps a discrepancy in meaning. We would also suggest on the fifth line down, “to bring Canada's trade laws into line with those in the United States”, perhaps a friendly amendment saying, “consider bringing Canada's trade laws into line”. I understand the French reflects that.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Not exactly. Excuse me, I have a point of order on this.

[John Maloney, Liberal, Welland, ON]

Perhaps our researcher could elaborate on that, but I think that would make it more palatable to us: “consider bringing Canada's trade laws into line with those of the United States”. I have a second issue once we get that resolved.