Evidence of meeting #75 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 mrl.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
Thank you very much.
We now have our last questioner, Mr. Hiebert. Then we'll have some business to take care of. We'll go in camera for that.
Go ahead, Mr. Hiebert.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
Thank you both for being here. I found the testimony to be very interesting. In some ways it's consistent with other testimony that we've heard, but also in other ways it's a little different.
You've both commented on the need for leveraging us in the case of the TPP.
Mr. Wilson, I think you were going to respond to my colleague when he asked Mr. Pyun for his take on the TPP angle. I'd like to give you the opportunity to respond with your perspective.
5:10 p.m.
Vice-President, National Policy, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters
I agree with what Pierre is saying about the opportunity to get in early in the negotiations to help set some of the framework for the negotiation.
I think one of the challenges Canada finds itself in with the TPP is that we're getting into the agreement fairly late, and a lot of the rules and guidelines and set-up have already been established concerning what they're negotiating on. Canada is having a bit of a difficulty in moving things along the way they want. If we get in at an early stage and get to help set the agenda and the framework, I think it's helpful.
In terms of what countries should be involved, it's hard. The Prime Minister will be going to a meeting in the fall, as an official observer, it looks like, and there could be a slight possibility that we will be invited in at that point, but it's probably a longer way off than that, and trying to dictate who should be in and who shouldn't is pretty difficult for us at this time.
As to the market priorities for our members in both global trade relations and global supply chains, as I mentioned in my remarks, there is a huge and growing importance of Central and Latin America. That's really, in this agreement, looking at if we can expand it beyond the four...[Inaudible—Editor]...Central America. Even that in and of itself would be a huge step forward, for many of our members.
I think that should be the initial priority. Let the TPP take its course, because it will be a bit ahead of this. It will probably give us an opportunity to look at other countries across the Pacific Rim that are outside the TPP and that could perhaps be invited in at a later date.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
You both also mentioned the benefit of labour mobility with these agreements. I'm curious. What degree of labour mobility is in place with the free trade agreements that we currently have with these countries?
5:15 p.m.
Vice-President, Government Affairs, Bombardier Inc.
Business mobility touches on a number of areas.
One area that is important for us would be accreditation of professionals. What free trade agreements can do is put in place a framework, but it would be up to the associations, really, to negotiate mutual recognition agreements for different professions. In some cases, even though the framework exists, we still have a long way to go in having such agreements in place between associations.
This would be an area of importance to us, and free trade agreements can help, but others have to contribute as well.
5:15 p.m.
Vice-President, National Policy, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters
Just to add to that, a lot of what we're talking about in terms of labour mobility is within supply chain labour mobility, intra-company transfers or intra-related parties mobility, and so involves tier one suppliers and engineers. We're not talking about agricultural workers or someone not related to a core business on the manufacturing side of things.
5:15 p.m.
Vice-President, Government Affairs, Bombardier Inc.
Work permits would be important as well. When we send people to work on a specific project, sometimes there are limitations as to the length of time people from outside the country can go in to work on projects as specialists. This was an issue in the context of the CETA negotiations, and it's an issue in the context of other free trade negotiations.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
My last question deals with the diplomatic and government relations that you mentioned, Mr. Pyun, in terms of giving an advantage to Embraer and ATI with their market penetration. I know that Mr. Wilson commented on the trade commissioner service, but are you thinking of something beyond trade commissioner services when you speak of the need for greater government participation or involvement to help get the contracts you're looking at?
What is it that Embraer—obviously, with Brazil it's more evident, but what is it that ATI, for example, does that we don't do and that you need?
5:15 p.m.
Vice-President, Government Affairs, Bombardier Inc.
In the case of ATI, I don't want to oversimplify the reason for their being very competitive in this market. I think they've been active in this market longer than we have, so we have some catching up to do. They have put in place the infrastructure as well to support their business. They have a training centre in Brazil. That's an important piece as well. I think we need to bridge the gap and keep on working hard to be more competitive in the region.
What I was referring to is that in the sectors in which we do business, there is often very strong government involvement. The government can be our customer in the case of rail, most times.
In the case of aerospace, we can play different roles. Regulator is one, of course. In some cases we're competing for business with state-owned enterprises, carriers that are state-owned, that are flag carriers of countries and owned by the government. In some cases we're seeing new entrants into the aerospace business—China and Russia—and we're facing competition from state-owned manufacturers that get very strong support from their government.
In order to level the playing field, what I'm talking about is economic diplomacy at the highest level, because whether we like it or not, this is what is expected, by our customers, by foreign governments, because in our deals, in the sectors in which we operate, constantly business interests rub shoulders with public policy and sometimes with politics as well.
In order to level the playing field—and we very much appreciate all the work currently being done by the government to ensure that we get this level playing field—sometimes we need ministers to express political support for a campaign we have going on abroad. Minister Fast, Minister Baird, and the Prime Minister in some instances, have been extremely supportive of the interests of Canadian firms, including Bombardier.
This is what I was referring to. Sometimes we work with our ambassadors abroad; we work very closely with the trade commissioner service to gather intelligence, to compare notes with them. But I was referring to high-level political support in the sectors in which we operate.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
Okay.
On behalf of the committee I want to thank you very much for coming forward. Your testimony is very valuable.
With that, Mathew and Pierre, thank you again.
We will suspend as we go in camera. Then we will have a very short opportunity to finish some business.
[Proceedings continue in camera]