Evidence of meeting #69 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 region.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Political Director and Assistant Deputy Minister, International Security, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean Branch, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Sorry, it's an iterative process when you're deciding what you do with a new alliance. There is no one document that I would call a cost- benefit analysis.
Political Director and Assistant Deputy Minister, International Security, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean Branch, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
There is an analysis that I set out in my opening remarks about the attraction of observership.
Conservative
Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS
I have a point of order.
What the opposition members are asking for is internal trade documents on research and development of ideas within the department. Those are not available to committee, and I think pursuing this line of questioning is a total waste of committee time.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
That may be, but he's asking the question, and I encourage the witnesses to keep answering the way they have, because I think they have done it the right way.
So go ahead. You can waste your time asking that question.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
This testimony that you presented today is based on some sort of documented research, a cost-benefit analysis that was done by the department. Would that be correct?
Political Director and Assistant Deputy Minister, International Security, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean Branch, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Since the Pacific Alliance was created in 2011, we have been engaged in analyzing what the Pacific Alliance is and what interest it holds for us. We have been engaged in discussions with Pacific Alliance members about what the Pacific Alliance is since 2011.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
Ms. Buck, I'm sorry, but I'm going to have you stop there. I'm going to ask my question.
Conservative
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
Could you please just answer my question?
Do you have a cost-benefit analysis that you did with respect to observer status in the Pacific Alliance?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
I think that question has been answered, but I'll see if they have anything further to say.
Political Director and Assistant Deputy Minister, International Security, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean Branch, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
There is no one document that I would call a cost-benefit analysis of observer status. There is a series of internal documents, conversations we have had, about what the Pacific Alliance is and what interest it holds for Canada, including Canada's observership, since the beginning of the Pacific Alliance.
Political Director and Assistant Deputy Minister, International Security, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean Branch, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
The analysis is not that complicated; it's the analysis—
Political Director and Assistant Deputy Minister, International Security, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean Branch, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
No, I'm sorry—
Political Director and Assistant Deputy Minister, International Security, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean Branch, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
It's the analysis that I attempted to set out to you in my opening remarks, and that I attempted to answer previously. Namely, observership is something that has a very low cost, and the benefit is that it allows us greater access to Pacific Alliance members to ask those questions about what Pacific Alliance means, what it will mean as it gels over time, and what the interest will be to Canada. So of course there has been an internal analysis of what the Pacific Alliance is since 2011.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
Ms. Buck, you talked about there being some costs related to joining the Pacific Alliance, a low cost. Can you elaborate on those costs?
Political Director and Assistant Deputy Minister, International Security, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean Branch, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
To date, it's been the cost of attending meetings as observers. When we talk to Pacific Alliance members, which is part of our normal business, it involves their travelling to Canada and our using our embassy network. It also involves me and Neil and the whole team travelling to Pacific Alliance member countries. In the context of a broader relationship, we'll bring up Pacific Alliance issues. We'll ask about it. Similarly, when ministers travel to the region, they ask about the Pacific Alliance. So the cost that is solely related to PA, as I've said, is attendance as observers at Pacific Alliance meetings. It's very minimal.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
Are those the only costs we're talking about here? Are there broader costs to our trade with those countries, in large part due to the kinds of products we're going to be exporting and the industries that could be hit here in Canada? Did we do any analysis along those lines?
Political Director and Assistant Deputy Minister, International Security, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean Branch, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
That, sir, would be the analysis associated with moving to full membership, and as I said we're not yet at that stage, because the Pacific Alliance is not yet clear about what the full threshold for membership is. They're still in internal negotiations. To be frank, on many of the issues, they are going to be for a very long time to come regarding some other elements of their agenda, such as the cooperation agenda that I spoke about.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
Thank you.
We've talked about trade deficits. What I'm hearing from the department is that trade deficits are somehow good. Over the last 12 months we've had record trade deficits. We had, seven years ago when the Conservatives took over, a surplus of trade of $25 billion, and now we have a trade deficit of about $60 billion. That's almost $85 billion in turnaround. That is quite a huge gap. Is the department saying that trade deficits are good?