International Trade Committee on Oct. 6th, 2010

[Gilles Gauthier, Director General and Chief Agriculture Negotiator, Negotiations and Multilateral Trade Policy Directorate, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Thank you for your question.

Generally speaking, it is clear that Jordan represents a fairly modest market. As it now stands, we export about $10 million in agricultural products. These include mostly lentils, peas and other products like this, where we are globally competitive, and the fact that some trade barriers will come down will give us even better access.

In other sectors, such as beef, we did not export to Jordan until now. The Americans have a privileged access to the Jordanian market, and they export about 3 million dollars' worth a year. So if we had the same kind of access as the United States, we might be able to compete with them. French fries are also a growing market throughout the world. Again, we have a fairly significant production capacity in that sector. On the whole, we are not talking about a very big market, but we can improve our access in certain sectors where we already export our products and where we are already globally competitive.

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

We understand that this would be a door into the Middle East, so it is very important.

Why are poultry products excluded?

[Gilles Gauthier]

As you know, Canada generally excludes its poultry products from its free trade agreements. This sector has no interest in exporting its products, and since it is a sensitive product for Jordanians, we agreed that it not be included in this agreement.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Merci.

Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks for coming today.

Fortunately, Jordan is not Colombia, but there are some provisions that seem be very similar to the Colombian trade deal. So I'd like to start with the labour provisions. Could you explain to us the similarities or differences between what we called in the Colombia trade deal the “kill a unionist, pay a fine” provisions and what I think more adequately in Jordan might be considered the “commit a crime, pay a fine” provisions?

I want to cite a report that came out in the spring from the National Labor Committee regarding the IBG factory in Jordan. Women are brought in from Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and India. Their passports are stripped. According to this report they're forced to work 15-hour shifts, seven days a week, with a mandatory all-night, 23-hour shift at least once a week. They are paid 35¢ an hour, which is half of the legal minimum wage of 75¢ an hour in Jordan. There are allegations of sexual harassment and rape. According to the report, the workers are housed in filthy, primitive dorms not fit for human beings. The dorms lack heat and water and are infested with bed bugs.

These are allegations that have been rendered public internationally. I wonder if, as part of the discussion around the Jordan agreement and the labour rights provision, officials from the Canadian government have visited that factory to see whether or not the allegations are true. If they have not, what would be the next steps for our government to take when there are clear violations of both our agreement and Jordanian labour law?

[Don Stephenson]

In terms of the side agreement, let me turn to my colleague from HRSDC.

Then, in terms of the efforts of the Government of Jordan to address these issues, I will maybe turn to John Holmes.

Debra.

[Debra Robinson, Director, International Labour Affairs, Department of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Thank you, Don.

Thank you, Mr. Julian, for your question.

The labour agreement with Jordan is very similar to the Colombian agreement. There are a few little modifications--some changes in language here and there. All of our labour agreements have some differences where we try to respond to and address differences in legal systems or priorities, interests, of the two parties.

In the case of Jordan, as you've pointed out, one key difference is the fact that in the provisions regarding the possibility of assessments or fines, there is no $15-million cap on the amount of money that could be assessed. What does that mean? It means that in the negotiations that was the one issue that the Jordanian officials were very reluctant to include in the agreement. They didn't want to include any provisions providing for the possibility of fines or assessments as an enforcement mechanism on the labour agreement. So that was probably the most challenging question.

In the end we were able to convince them to include it, but they didn't want to have any particular figure in there. One concern they had was that under their system, if there was a specific amount of an assessment they might have to do a budget allocation for that amount, and $15 million is a very large amount for the labour department in Jordan.

So we considered the situation. The issue of whether it's better to have a maximum amount or not is certainly up for debate. There are experts who say that by having a maximum there would be a tendency to increase the amount of a fine. But technically speaking, if there is no maximum then the panel is free to render whatever amount they think is necessary in order to remedy a non-compliance with the labour provisions.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

So that's the key difference.

[Debra Robinson]

That's the key difference. There may be some other wording differences in the agreement, but that is the main difference in the key provisions.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Thank you for that.

Moving back to the IBG controversy, John....

[John Holmes]

Thank you.

I will have to speak generally. I am not aware of that particular case. I should say that I was the Canadian ambassador in Jordan from 2003 to 2006, and I've been in this position for about a year.

The government is committed to strengthening its laws. It has recognition of most internationally recognized human rights in its constitution and laws, and it's working progressively harder to try to ensure full implementation of those rights and standards. Challenges do exist. Your example may well be one type of example. The issue of migrant workers has been a perennial challenge for the government--ensuring that the standards that exist are fully enforced by the employers who run the factories.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

I'm sorry to cut you short, but I have other questions.

So nobody from the Canadian government has actually visited the factory, as far as you're aware.

[John Holmes]

No one has as far as I am aware, but I was going to say that during my time there--not with respect to specific questions--I had no trouble getting access to companies. I visited several of the companies in the different zones. Generally, the standards might not be the same as they would be in Toronto or Montreal, but they were safe, and the staff seemed well taken care of.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Thank you for that. So obviously there's a monitoring issue, then, if no one has actually visited the factory.

I have only a couple of minutes left, so I'm going to move on to another couple of questions.

One is on the impact assessment--

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Sorry, we'll have to get back to you, Peter, because you have only seven seconds left.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

--and total investments in product promotion and support.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Go ahead, then.

[Douglas George]

There was an environmental impact assessment. We do have some investments. Potash Corporation has an investment in a Jordanian potash company, and....

Are there others?

[John Holmes]

As far as major investments go, I'm trying to remember.

[Don Stephenson]

Was your question with respect to government spending in trade promotion, or was it--

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

It was on the total amount in Jordan.

[Douglas George]

With respect to government spending, in terms of people on the ground, we have two locally engaged staff in our embassy in Jordan. The senior trade commissioner is located in Damascus. I believe there's $400,000 annually in investment in trade promotion in the area.

[John Holmes]

That's counting salaries and operational costs and programming, so that's the whole package. That's specifically for Jordan. We also have some responsibility out of Jordan for Iraq. We have a limited presence in Iraq. I would point out that this is a growing market for us, which we're trying to serve from regional posts because of the security situation, so the FTA, we believe, will have some incremental benefits as we try to get into the Iraqi market, which is potentially huge.

[Douglas George]

There have been a number of specific actions undertaken by the embassy in order to promote the FTA. There's a budget of approximately $15,000 specifically for promoting this FTA.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Sorry, we're going to have to cut you off. We're a little over time and we are pressed, so I'm only going to be able to give five minutes to this side over here because we have other business.

Thank you, Mr. Julian.

Mr. Cannan.