International Trade Committee on Feb. 13th, 2008

[Steve Khan]

Yes, sure. It's public information.

We actually have an agreement under which they will spend a total of $15 million over three years to earn a 50% interest in one of our projects. We have numerous projects in the Athabasca basin and in Quebec. They are looking to enter into further discussions on our other projects. This is the door opening to Korean companies as well as other companies. We are now getting red-flagged as a company and also as an industry. As an industry, when these types of announcements are made in the international community, others pay heed. They see an opportunity they could explore as well. Canada is a great safe haven. It has a huge abundance of resources. The development of this area is massive and could lead to significant opportunities in other resources. These are all things that bode well for us.

For a company of our size and stature, this puts us in a big international context, which will lead to other contracts of this size.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West—Glanbrook, ON]

Mr. Khan, Mr. Miller has one more question.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Mr. Khan, you talked earlier about how this might help to open up other Asian markets. I believe Mr. Westcott spoke of this as well. Will this help companies related to your industry? What's the potential for opening them up, the dollar value? Any opinion on this?

[Steve Khan]

That's a good question. In fact, KEPCO currently has 20 nuclear power plants. They are now looking to expand their technology worldwide, to provide their nuclear power plants to the international community. They're talking to countries like Canada. They're looking at bringing their services in to provide their product. They have a unique, competitive product that could benefit countries like ourselves.

In developing our tar sands, nuclear power plants could provide a safe and secure source of energy that would allow us to explore these resources and reduce our costs.

Companies like KEPCO are looking to build relationships in countries like Canada. This opens doors to many other countries as well—they are looking at bringing their technology to Cambodia, Vietnam, and Australia.

We're talking about a company with annual revenues of $29 billion, 31,000 employees—a company far larger than many of our Canadian companies. They're one of the ten largest utilities in the world. When a company of that stature comes to a small company like ours, it can be somewhat overwhelming.

The opportunities are outstanding. We are just the foot in the door that they'll use to explore other business opportunities. Their interests are in hydroelectric, coal, and other resources that could lead to further opportunities in Canada.

In the Asian community particularly, it's about relationships. When they build relationships, they look to explore other opportunities. So I think that this is just the beginning—many others will be entering into this arena.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

The fact that you were approached speaks well for your company, the Canadian industry, and the Canadian product. I congratulate you on that.

That's all I have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Thank you, Mr. Miller.

Mr. Dhaliwal.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

My question is to Ms. Healy.

You mentioned in your presentation that there will be more jobs created in the processing industry. Newton—North Delta is my riding, and I see a lot of fishermen around there. In local banquet halls, in the restaurants I go to, like Burger King or McDonald's, even though I'm a vegetarian now, I notice that they serve fish caught here, sent to China for processing, and then sold back to us. I'm not sure how an agreement with Korea will create jobs for us in processing and the fishing industry.

[Dr. Teresa Healy]

There is certainly an illogical situation, when you describe things like that. As we see the manufacturing shrinking in Canada and we see the horizon, probably what we should do is think about Korea and what other agreements are on the horizon. We really need to take this into consideration. Why would we choose a trade policy that would do such damage to our industrial sector in such a widespread area?

We have been hearing today about some possibilities for economic advantage in certain areas, but when we look at the more general situation, we're in deep trouble. Why are we choosing that kind of policy? Why wouldn't we do that manufacturing here? Why wouldn't we have more secondary manufacturing and more complicated steps along the industrial path done right here in Canada? Why are we choosing to build a new set of infrastructure to receive containers from other parts of the world, which would then ship products into Canada? Why are we choosing that path in our infrastructure development and for our new investments in infrastructure?

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

In fact, it's becoming more and more of a reality now that if we have to compete in the globalization situation, we cannot compete with big giants like China and India in the labour force. Do you have some alternatives in mind by means of which we can be competitive on the world scene?

[Dr. Teresa Healy]

What we have to do is pay very careful attention to the form of development and start the discussion about those sorts of alternatives, instead of saying that they're simply protectionist or simply not on in a globalized economy.

In fact, there are all kinds of possibilities for us to look at the resources we have and think about them in a sustainable way and not have a short-term focus on our economic development. Why would we look at the incredible resources of this country and say, let's ship them out as quickly as possible, without becoming involved in a more nuanced model of development, which would look at how those resources can be used in a more sustainable way for the benefit of the economy and the society as a whole?

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

My question is for Mr. Westcott.

You said 50% of your spirits are exported to the U.S. How big an export industry do you have to Korea right now?

[Jan Westcott]

It's about $800,000 a year.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

What change do you see from signing an agreement like this?

[Jan Westcott]

We see a terrific opportunity to expand that $800,000. If we didn't see that, we wouldn't be here. We definitely see opportunity to grow our business in Korea.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

By how much?

[Jan Westcott]

Certainly double, triple....

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

When you say double, how many full-time, high-paid jobs would you create? Can you give me numbers? On the other hand, we'll lose some, and I just want to have that picture clear to us.

[Jan Westcott]

First of all, we don't believe we would lose any jobs. This would be a gain for the Canadian industry. Pressure on the business today—

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Can you give me numbers? Would it be 10 jobs, 20, 100, 1,000? That's what I'm looking at—just for the Korean trade.

[Jan Westcott]

I wouldn't say it would be 1,000. It would be somewhere up to 1,000, potentially. It depends upon how big the business gets.

We are a primary manufacturer. We take raw materials and turn them into highly finished goods. The people we employ are skilled. It takes time for them to learn those skills. They are valuable skills to have inside this country.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

My question is for Ms. Lamoureux. It's the same question I asked Ms. Healey earlier. You also mentioned conditions for the workers. You are concerned about the well-being of the workers here locally and in Korea. Is that true?

[Josée Lamoureux]

Yes.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Could you tell me how the lives of those people would be negatively affected and what the government should do to make sure that their concerns and the conditions that will be created are taken care of, if this treaty goes ahead?

[Josée Lamoureux]

As I said in my opening remarks, when we sign trade agreements of this kind, when we include the respect of basic labour standards, we are at least assured that employers in those countries, or even here when you come right down to it, will not take the opportunity to violate rights in order to obtain unjustified advantages on the backs of their workers.

I think that if we at least uphold these standards, if we make sure that they are really upheld and that labour law is applied in each of these countries, at least we can stop that sort of thing happening. I think it is important for us to do so.

We often ask for it to be done, but there are no real requirements or incentives. We are happy just asking for rules to be observed, but there are no firm measures in place to make sure that they really are.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

I think we've got a bell going.

We are being called to the House for a vote, so we're going to have to wrap this up.

I thank you again. I think we did very well today in getting through. I appreciate the answers of the witnesses. They were very concise. I appreciate your being here. Thank you again.

Mr. Cannan.