Evidence of meeting #24 for International Trade in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pork.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:40 p.m.
Executive Director, Canada Pork International
They were very difficult to meet in the first place, because had we met those requirements, we would have been in Italy and Spain rather than in Poland or Romania.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
John Cannis Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON
How do you feel they were difficult? Is it something Canada is not measuring up to, or did they set the bar so high?
4:40 p.m.
Executive Director, Canada Pork International
No, they're completely different, and that's what I explained earlier. It doesn't matter what colour the fence is, and that's where the problem was. We had a completely different set of standards. In one case they wanted fences and they needed a wall between the packaging area and the boxes. Three years ago Canada was able to negotiate a simplified veterinary agreement, but still it requires some investments. We're talking about millions. Before we were talking about the fact that if you had built a plant just for the EU, according to the EU standards, you would never have qualified for Canada and the U.S.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson
Thank you.
We're going to have two more quick ones. We'll go to Mr. Keddy and wrap it up with Mr. Guimond.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome to our witnesses.
I'm going to pick up where Mr. Cannis left off, because it's problematic and I think it's something we have to try to wrestle to the ground in this agreement. It's certainly not just in pork; it's in beef, it's in fish. There's a huge divergence in their health and safety standards within their packing plants and abattoirs. I would like to explore that a little bit more.
I guess what you're saying, Mr. Pomerleau, is it's simply not a sanitary issue; it's absolutely every regulation you can possibly throw into the mix.
4:40 p.m.
Executive Director, Canada Pork International
In a sense, yes. What we are looking at is not the ways you achieve the result, but at the result itself.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS
So you're talking low bacteria, no bacteria counts, fresh product.
4:40 p.m.
Executive Director, Canada Pork International
Yes, internationally recognized standards. So if we are able, through our various systems and ways of doing it, to achieve the same results, why should you worry if the wall is red or not?
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS
Where I'm going with that is what we see in some other areas, different standards from different countries, yet they all meet the EU standard. So Italy, Spain, Portugal, Germany, and France may all have slightly different standards, but somehow they're all members of the EU and they all meet the EU standard. How problematic is that, and do we have an actual working group?
I know CFIA has been doing a number of inspections supposedly to come up to the European standard, but what I'm hearing from you is that's a bit unclear. Do we have a working group between CFIA and the regulatory board in the European Union to try to dovetail some of these standards?
4:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Canada Pork International
We do, and that's why they came up with a simplified agreement. It's a much easier agreement to work with now than it was a few years back.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Canada Pork International
No, I can't. I don't really know who is there, but it's likely to be Dr. Brian Evans, and it should be negotiated at that level.
But for your information, it's not all European plants that comply with the European requirements.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS
Of course. Understood.
On the TRQs, I appreciate the fact that you put in here that it's a complicated system. Maybe it's too complicated to explain simply here, but can you follow up with some information so we can actually get into some of the nitty-gritty on that?
4:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Canada Pork International
Yes, but you will see that they have 500 tonnes of one line, and then there's a long list of lines. It's amazing how it's done.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Canada Pork International
Okay. I'll send it to Mr. David.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS
I'm interested in your comments on the rules-of-origin labelling. Quite often we hear just the opposite, that rules-of-origin labelling actually are restrictive.
In your case, because you have a superior product, once people identify that product as a product of Canada, they're going to come back for it again.
4:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Canada Pork International
Hopefully. It depends on the countries. We had to be very careful because in some countries, if it comes from outside, it's a no-no. Japan is one of the best examples we've ever had. We were forced to identify the Canadian origin and that's how our sales really took off, but it does not always work in other countries.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Canada Pork International
Yes, or in some areas of the United States.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
Bloc
Claude Guimond Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, gentlemen.
My question is for Mr. Grenier.
At the outset, you referred to the difference between multilateral and bilateral agreements and the consequences thereof. I want you to know that we of the Bloc Québécois agree with you. Multilateral agreements must definitely be given priority.
Furthermore, we observe that within the current negotiation process, the negotiators and their teams are governed by very strict confidentiality agreements, which prevents information from flowing freely. It is clear that this creates a great deal of insecurity and dissatisfaction, particularly among people in Quebec's agricultural sector, which I am more familiar with.
What is your opinion on these very strict confidentiality agreements?
June 17th, 2010 / 4:45 p.m.
As an Individual
I myself participated in this type of negotiations for the Canadian delegation in the 1970s, and I thus understand the importance of a fairly high level of confidentiality, due to the importance of the issues. These issues may even, in some cases, influence markets. If a rumour begins spreading that a concession is being granted for a given type of product, you can easily imagine how that would affect the companies listed on the stock exchange. That is one of the reasons why this type of confidentiality exists.
In addition, there is often more than one party. In fact, some negotiations are conducted among more than two parties and that is why they must be fairly careful.
As I stated earlier, the presence at the negotiating table of provinces that are not there to speak on their own behalf, but rather to see how the negotiations are carried out, means that information will be shared more easily than in the past, in my opinion.
4:50 p.m.
Bloc
Claude Guimond Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Thank you.
On another topic, we know that Europe is very advanced in the area of green technology development. This is a market in which Quebec would like to make progress as well.
Could the agreement currently being negotiated be advantageous or detrimental for Quebec in this particular sector of activity?