Evidence of meeting #31 for International Trade in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was agreements.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Are you suggesting that that's a result of the trade agreements being signed, that they put pressure on there?
Executive Director, Council of Canadians
Yes, because those agreements are about maintaining the rights of corporations—for example, to have access to water—and putting that in an international agreement, and then giving an opportunity to another country or to a company to take actions against a Jordanian decision that may need to be made with respect to providing water for its citizens. That's the problem.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Okay, thank you.
Turning to labour, both of you have mentioned the protections and the enforceability of the rules around investment and how that compares with labour and the lack of enforceability. I do think we have huge problems there. There's no question that on the investment side it's done in a way to enhance and protect the movement of capital in the interests of those who have money, and those increasingly more powerful global corporations and individuals are stacked against labour.
So we're protecting the economically powerful, but we're not protecting so much the ordinary folks who do the work to make the money but don't get the profit.
What has to be done to bring the two into balance? I think a lot of people are increasingly worried in the global arena as fewer and fewer players internationally gain more and more power. Some of these huge companies are more powerful than countries themselves. How do we bring the two into balance, and can you actually do it through side agreements in an FTA?
Labour Lawyer, United Steelworkers
I'll address that initially. I have two very straightforward suggestions in terms of how the agreements are put together themselves. First, we think labour rights should not be relegated to a side agreement. The same would apply for environmental rights. The labour rights should be built into the main body of the agreement itself. That's the first suggestion.
Second, we think that both labour and environmental rights ought to be subject to the same complaint and enforcement mechanism that investors have access to. In this particular case of the Canada-Jordan agreement, as was mentioned earlier, investor rights are actually not specifically found in the FTA itself; they're found in a separate agreement. I think—and I've taken this position before at this committee—if we are going to take seriously the idea that these agreements can be used to meaningfully enforce environmental and labour rights, instead of thinking of them as simply some sort of window dressing to try to make the passage of these agreements more palatable, then we should provide real and meaningful enforceable rights to labour and environment that are similar to the investor-state provisions. That's my position.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Mr. Rowlinson, with regard to the labour end, you mentioned as well the 2001 agreement with the United States. I think it was said before in this committee that really not a lot of improvements have been made in the labour end.
I do want to read into the record, Mr. Chair, what Mr. Kernaghan said, because I think it's important to have the same testimony as yours. He was talking about the Rich Pine Factory:
The workers have no rights whatsoever. It's a real sweatshop. Workers are housed in primitive dormitories. The Chinese workers and Bangladeshi workers have no voice.
Then he goes on from there. He concludes by saying:
I would say in that Rich Pine factory, every single labour right under Jordanian law and under the U.S. free trade agreement is being blatantly violated in broad daylight.
That's a pretty damning statement.
I would say that every one of us on this committee, when he talked about another factory—it was a Chinese factory where there was talk of rape and abuse of workers—were all shocked, because the previous testimony we'd heard from the ambassador of Jordan said this wasn't happening now.
What can we do, either before we enter or after we enter an FTA with Jordan to bring focus to that issue? Would it make sense for the Canadian government to encourage a joint meeting of Canada, the U.S., and Jordan to talk about these issues and nail them right on?
Conservative
Labour Lawyer, United Steelworkers
Very quickly, during the process leading up to the Canada-Colombia FTA negotiations, this committee, differently constituted, issued a report. That report recommended that a human rights impact assessment be done before Canada actually entered into the Canada-Colombia FTA. Now, that impact assessment was never done, but we thought that report was at least a good first step by this committee to consider the possible impact these free trade agreements can have on the workers who are affected by them.
That's my short answer.
Conservative
Devinder Shory Conservative Calgary Northeast, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, witnesses, for being here today.
Everybody knows that this government has an ambitious trade agenda, because we strongly believe that trade creates jobs and it also provides opportunities for businesses, specifically for SMEs, so they can expand their business and create jobs here in Canada. We also believe our witnesses when they say that engaging developing countries through trade does assist them in improving their labour, environmental, and human rights areas. It is through engagement such as we have had with Colombia that countries are able to grow their economies, share best practices, and move forward on labour, environmental, and human standards.
Mr. Rowlinson, my question to you is, do you believe, as the NDP does, that we should not trade with developing countries that need some support in strengthening their labour, environmental, and human rights laws?
Labour Lawyer, United Steelworkers
Again, as I said in my opening statement, our union and the Canadian labour movement in general recognizes the importance of trade. We are not anti-trade per se, but we say that trade ought to take place under specific terms in which, again, the terms of the trade agreements make it possible for everyone to benefit from trade, both Canadian workers and workers, in this case, in Jordan.
Our experience with the free trade agreements, by and large, negotiated by the Canadian government has been that everyone doesn't benefit from those free trade agreements, that in fact they lead to greater power for investors and corporations, they lead to greater economic inequality, and in fact they lead to a diminution of workers' rights and trade union rights.
I'm not sure if that answers your question. Again, we're not opposed to trade, but it's the terms under which trade takes place.
Executive Director, Council of Canadians
It seems to me that there's no evidence to support your contention that trade creates jobs and that trade assists countries to improve their human rights records. There is simply no evidence.
We see the hollowing out of Canada's industrial infrastructure right now, and it's because of the trade agenda, frankly. You state it as fact, and there's no evidence.
Conservative
Devinder Shory Conservative Calgary Northeast, AB
It is a fact, Mr. Neil, that one job in five Canadian jobs is related to trade. Anybody can do the research on that.
What is very impressive in the comment made by Mr. Rowlinson, and of course by the NDP, is that they say they are not anti-trade but they put such strong caveats on their support that it is not basically possible for them to support, and they do not support....
Witnesses also have suggested that the free trade agreement between Jordan and the United States has not improved the situation in Jordan. However, trade between Jordan and the United States has increased dramatically, resulting in increased jobs and economic growth in Jordan. The United States also has a labour agreement with Jordan.
My question again to Mr. Rowlinson is, do you deny the link between economic growth and the standard of living?
Labour Lawyer, United Steelworkers
I certainly deny the link between economic growth and the standard of living for many. The problem is that the improvements in the standard of living to which you refer are not equally distributed. As I mentioned earlier, since the U.S.-Jordan FTA was signed in 2001, there has been very limited improvement in the standard of living for many Jordanian workers, particularly migrant workers working in the garment sector, as was discussed earlier.
So, again, the notion that the benefits of trade are equally distributed is just simply not correct, in our view.
Conservative
Devinder Shory Conservative Calgary Northeast, AB
As a legal counsel for the union, Mr. Rowlinson, you must take the rights of labour to form unions, to actively participate in unions, and to strike very seriously.
Do you feel that Jordanian laws have come far enough, and if not, what specific concern do you have? What should be done by the Jordanians?
Labour Lawyer, United Steelworkers
Reference has been made before the committee to I believe a 2010 change to the Jordanian labour law, which provided, I will concede, to some extent greater rights for migrant workers to join unions, but there continues to be substantial and discriminatory treatment against migrant workers, particularly in sort of free trade zones in Jordan, that prevent them from exercising fundamental rights, such as freedom association, which Mr. Vogt referred to. Clearly those issues need to be addressed.
I think one principle we can probably all agree on is that labour law, and indeed all law, should apply to everyone equally. The fact is that the large migrant workforce in Jordan is not treated equally. It is openly discriminated against. As Mr. Kernaghan said, they work virtually in almost indentured conditions for very long hours. They work enormous amounts of uncompensated overtime frequently for roughly 70¢ an hour. Those issues simply need to be addressed. Labour laws should apply to everyone equally, as I said earlier. In my view, that's the key issue that should be addressed.
The other issue I wanted to note, and I mentioned it in my opening remarks, is the systemic and pervasive gender discrimination that all of the evidence points to, particularly in the Jordanian garment sector. You heard Mr. Kernaghan testify about issues of sexual assault in workplaces. Those gender discrimination issues are again pervasive and appalling, and they need to be addressed by Jordanian law.
NDP
Raymond Côté NDP Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I thank the witnesses for being here with us today to answer our questions.
I would like to talk about the protection of investors. Indeed I have raised several questions on this topic in the course of this committee's work. We discussed other free trade agreements and the one with Jordan. I will not hide from you, Mr. Neil, the fact that I am fiercely opposed to the setting up of this type of protection for foreign investors who would like to come and invest in Canada, because of the very grave consequences you so eloquently explained.
However, I have certain concerns with regard to bilateral free trade agreements with countries that have as little protection in place as Jordan. Do you consider that this type of investor protection could have even worse consequences in Jordan, in connection with social protection or labour law-related safeguards?
Executive Director, Council of Canadians
I think that is fair to say.
I don't know if this committee is aware—you probably had some research on this—that the Jordanian government began to privatize heavily in about 1996. One of the companies that took advantage of that is Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan, which now owns roughly 30% of the Arab Potash Company.
There is now debate within Jordan about whether it was correct to nationalize. Of course, because of the trade agreements, and particularly the investment agreement, Jordan would have a very difficult time reversing that decision. The Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan would have the right to file an action against the Jordanian government if it chose to take that action. They'd probably get a tribunal to side with them.
I think that highlights the problem with the investment side of the agreement. It is tied to goods, because of course they are there to mine potash, which is primarily for export from Jordan, although I doubt they'll be exporting it to Canada.
So that highlights the problem in a very concrete way with respect to Canada and Jordan.
Labour Lawyer, United Steelworkers
Our members work for the Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan in Saskatchewan. Premier Wall could testify firsthand to the importance of that industry to the Saskatchewan economy and to the importance of being able to maintain some sort of domestic control over that company. Indeed, it is an issue upon which he has placed a great deal of emphasis and has run publicly.
NDP
Raymond Côté NDP Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Thank you very much.
I would like to raise another issue.
Mr. Rowlinson, I found your answers on the separate agreement and the comparison between the protection of workers' rights and investors' rights very interesting.
In that same context, do you think that not granting exaggerated protection to investors could constitute a part of the solution to the problem of a lack of protection for workers in a country like Jordan? Earlier you talked about granting equivalent protection, but if we turn the issue around, perhaps the fact of avoiding overprotecting investors could solve certain problems related to the protection of workers. What do you think of that?
Labour Lawyer, United Steelworkers
I think your point is very well taken. The fact is that robust investor-state provisions that we see in Canadian trade agreements and in the investor agreement with Jordan have a pernicious and dangerous effect upon the rights of workers.
The point I was making was really in answer to Mr. Easter's question about how you could improve the workers' rights provisions. I suggested that if you want to improve them you should give them a more robust enforcement mechanism. I wasn't necessarily endorsing the overarching rights of investors and corporations that are frequently found in these agreements.
What I think we need to do to, to be honest, and what I would like to see at some point, is have a more inclusive and transparent discussion among organizations such as ours, the trade union movement, NGOs, and other labour organizations about how we can have a trade regime that truly respects labour and environmental rights. We can start to rethink how we want to regulate trade so that its benefits are spread out to more people.
Conservative
Conservative
Ron Cannan Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, gentlemen, for your perspectives on this very important part of our government's plans for jobs and growth and long-term prosperity for Canadians.
As my colleague alluded to, one in five jobs is related to trade. Minister Fast, in the past year, has been living out of a suitcase, travelling around the world opening new markets for Canada.
We have been at a disadvantage in Jordan for a number of years because of the United States and their agreement, so we're trying to level the playing field.
You made comments about being more inclusive and transparent. I've been on this committee for over six years. We've been studying this agreement for a number of years, and we've had numerous witnesses, so I'm not sure how much more inclusive....
At the end of the day, you have to make a decision. You either agree or you don't agree. I just want your confirmation. We're using the same framework and principles for this Jordan free trade agreement, with regard to the environment and labour, etc., as we used for Colombia and Panama. Is it fair to say that this is why you didn't support those agreements?
Labour Lawyer, United Steelworkers
We did not support the free trade agreement, certainly, with Colombia. I'm not sure we took a particular position on the Panama free trade agreement. But yes, as you point out, the provisions are very similar.
Conservative
Ron Cannan Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
You say that the labour movement, generally, and the United Steelworkers are not opposed to trade agreements. Could you share with us which trade agreement the United Steelworkers has supported?
