Evidence of meeting #21 for International Trade in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was tpp.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Kirsten Hillman  Canada's Chief Negotiator, Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Trade Policy and Negotiations, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

11 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

I'd like to call the meeting to order.

We are into our study on the benefits for Canada of the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement. We have the department with us today; we have Kirsten Hillman and Nadia Theodore.

Thank you for being here. I see you have significant staff behind you as a resource. We're looking forward to you presenting and to our being able to probe you with questions. Third time's a charm: I think this is the third time we've had you booked to come to committee. Usually it's nonsense in the House. I will blame the opposition for this, but nonetheless....

You see? They're not refuting it, so it must be right.

11 a.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

11 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

At any rate, thank you for being here. We look forward to your presentation, after which we'll move on to questions and answers.

The floor is yours.

11 a.m.

Kirsten Hillman Canada's Chief Negotiator, Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Trade Policy and Negotiations, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Thank you very much.

Good morning, everyone.

Good morning, everyone.

My name is Kirsten Hillman. I am the Associate Assistant Deputy Minister of the Trade Policy and Negotiations Branch at Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada, and Canada's Chief Negotiator for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, negotiations.

Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to have the opportunity to speak with the committee today in support of your study on the benefits of the TPP to Canada, particularly at such an important juncture in the negotiations.

With me today, from DFATD is Nadia Theodore, who is our director of the TPP division, communications and engagement.

I'd like to start by saying that I have read with great interest the exchanges that you have had with witnesses appearing before the committee in the spring, as well as more recently with several Canadian stakeholders in British Columbia. I noted in particular that a number of stakeholders in B.C. highlighted the importance of free trade agreements as a way of helping diversify Canadian trade.

They also cited the potential to lower both tariff and non-tariff barriers impeding Canada's exporters' access to key markets, including in the Asia Pacific, and the importance of competing on a level playing field with other global players.

The value of being part of the TPP as a transformative agreement, as they call it, was also expressed. If successful, the TPP with its current membership and as it continues to grow will undoubtedly set the terms of trade in Asia.

I note that the comments you have heard are similar to those we have heard from our own consultations with Canadians. Consultations have been a very important part of the process for us and have helped us inform our positions, the positions that we have taken throughout the negotiations since we joined. We continue to welcome the input of stakeholders, and have mechanisms in place to support an ongoing and productive consultation process.

From a comprehensive Canada Gazette notice as well as through meetings, briefings, and other methods we have used to engage Canadians, we've heard a number of views including those of Canadian businesses, provinces, territories, academia, civil society, and organizations and individuals. While a few concerns have been raised with specific elements of the negotiations, overall there is very strong and very broad support for Canada's participation in the TPP.

I'd like to talk a little about the TPP as a strategic opportunity for Canada.

Budget 2014 reiterated the government's commitment to opening new markets for Canadian goods, services, and investment. The government has demonstrated its commitment through the recent conclusion of the Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement as well as through expanding trade with emerging markets in Asia and the Americas through our engagement in the TPP.

The TPP is an initiative that is squarely in line with the government's ambitious trade policy agenda. The global markets action plan, which is the blueprint for creating opportunities for Canadians through trade, identifies both the emerging and established markets in the TPP as priority markets for Canada, given the important opportunities they represent for Canadian businesses.

Broadly speaking, the TPP represents an important economic and strategic opportunity, I would say, in three ways. First, the TPP negotiations are a significant part of Canada's efforts to expand our commercial presence in the high-growth Asian markets. Second, being part of this transformative initiative enables Canada to be part of the rule-setting process that will impact how trade and investment are negotiated more broadly going forward. Third, the TPP provides Canada with the opportunity to work with our largest trading partner, the U.S., to pursue outcomes that protect and further enhance North American integration and supply chains.

I'd just like to turn to each one of these briefly.

First, the Asia Pacific is a priority region for Canadian businesses as well as for Canadian trade policy promotion. The Asia Pacific region is home to some of the fastest-growing economies in the world. And with both the U.S. and Japan, the world's largest and third-largest economies, respectively, the TPP market represents more than 792 million people and a combined GDP of $28.1 trillion. This is almost 40% of the world's economy.

The TPP holds significance for Canada's relationship in the Asia Pacific region and for our broader efforts to diversify Canada's trade and investment in order to create new sources of prosperity for Canadians. Solidifying and expanding Canadian access to global markets is essential to maintaining and enhancing Canada's competitiveness in an increasingly complex global environment. The TPP is among the best mechanisms we have to achieve that goal. This is particularly true as the TPP is expected to grow to include other countries in the region in the future. In fact, Korea has recently expressed strong interest in pursuing participation in the TPP. As more countries follow suit, the value of the TPP to us, from both a commercial and a geopolitical perspective, simply grows.

As a modern, high-quality agreement, the TPP will become the leading mechanism for Asia Pacific economic integration. For Canada, this expansion is fully in line with our trade priorities in the region and highlights the critical point that Canada's participation in these negotiations is essential.

Second, it is important for us to be part of the rule-setting process. Although there are currently other regional negotiations in the Asia Pacific, including the ASEAN-led Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, or RCEP, nothing in the region compares to the TPP in terms of level of ambition, comprehensiveness, or scope.

Canadian companies have long recognized that sitting on the sidelines is simply not an option when it comes to today's global economy. Participating in the TPP means that Canada is at the forefront of designing new rules governing trade and investment not only for the Asia Pacific region, but for the wider global market.

The TPP has been called a 21st-century initiative, but what exactly does that mean? To put it simply, it means that in addition to lowering tariffs we are placing significant emphasis on new and emerging challenges that our companies face in the modern knowledge-based economy and the highly competitive global market. For example, we're seeking strong rules in relation to intellectual property protection and enforcement for our innovators; we're seeking to raise the bar in relation to reducing non-tariff barriers to trade; we are trying to ensure effective competition rules for state-owned enterprises; and we're focusing on transparency and regulatory coherence. Negotiators are also pursuing rules that support small and medium-sized enterprises, and recognize the unique nature of the digital economy. We're working to support supply chains.

These are all the kinds of issues that make this, the TPP, a modern, 21st-century trade agreement.

That brings me to the third reason that the TPP is a key element of Canada's pro-trade plan. This initiative provides Canada with the opportunity to work alongside our largest trading partner, the U.S., in pursuing expanded opportunities in the broader Asia Pacific region. Our economy continues to be highly integrated with the U.S., and while we look to pursue new opportunities and to diversify trade to support sustained growth, we cannot forget the importance of promoting and protecting this relationship.

The potential offered by the TPP to strengthen the North American partnership was highlighted, as you will likely have seen, in the North American Leaders' Summit joint statement that was issued last month.

The TPP is giving Canadians an opportunity to protect and enhance North American supply chains, while advancing Canadian interests vis-à-vis our critical partner to the south, the United States.

Let me now briefly summarize our key objectives in the negotiations. Naturally, we are seeking an ambitious TPP outcome across all areas of the negotiations.

That said, with respect to the rules being negotiated under the TPP, several areas have been of particular interest to stakeholders. As such, we have been pushing for strong outcomes in relation to protection and promotion of inward and outward investment, strong and balanced rules on intellectual property rights and enforcement, improved regulatory transparency, and effective disciplines on crown corporations, among others.

We are also placing priority on improved market access for a wide range of goods, while also seeking gains through market access enhancements for government procurement and services trade, including for service providers. These are areas that could have significant positive economic impacts and that Canadian businesses have emphasized.

We're working hard to achieve outcomes on these and other issues in order to meet our goal of realizing tangible benefits for Canada.

The TPP countries are at an important stage in the negotiations, having concluded 19 full negotiating rounds, of which Canada has taken part in the last five. We have moved to a new format with frequent engagement at the level of technical experts, chief negotiators, and ministers.

Our most recent meetings were in Singapore. Chief negotiators met from February 17 to 21, while ministers gathered for four days from February 22 to 25. The meetings in Singapore enabled frank discussions among members on a path forward. They also allowed TPP members to reaffirm our shared commitment to conclude a comprehensive next-generation agreement that supports the creation and retention of jobs and promotion of economic development in all TPP countries. Members are aware of the work that needs to be done to meet these goals and will be continuing to resolve outstanding issues.

As for the next steps, negotiators have been working tirelessly over the last several months. These efforts will continue as TPP countries work to narrow the remaining gaps and move towards concluding the balanced, ambitious, next-generation agreement that we all seek.

Canada will also continue to ensure that a high level of engagement is maintained with the Canadian public, as well as with Canadian provinces and territories, particularly in areas of provincial/territorial jurisdiction and interest.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, free trade negotiations are increasingly important for promoting Canadian commercial interests around the world and therefore for creating prosperity here at home. Our competitors are negotiating agreements at a pace never seen before. Canada has risen to the challenge with our own ambitious pro-trade plan, and Canada's participation in the TPP is a key element of that.

The government is committed to ensuring that Canada pursues its interests across all sectors in the TPP in order to secure tangible benefits for all regions in Canada.

I thank the committee for this opportunity. My team and I look forward to hearing your views. I would also be happy to take any questions at this time.

Thank you.

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Thank you very much for your presentation, and your introduction from the department's perspective.

We'll now turn to questions and answers.

We'll start with Monsieur Morin. The floor is yours.

March 25th, 2014 / 11:15 a.m.

NDP

Marc-André Morin NDP Laurentides—Labelle, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to begin by thanking the witnesses for joining us. We appreciate their being here, especially because the negotiators certainly have a lot to teach us.

Contrary to what the government may think, the NDP is pleased to support agreements that benefit Canadians. However, we know practically nothing about the TPP. We have absolutely no details about the partnership, and this worries us a bit. That is why we have many questions for you today. So thank you in advance.

Canada joined the negotiations a few years late. Did that fact affect its negotiating position? If so, in what chapters can that lateness have a negative effect?

11:15 a.m.

Canada's Chief Negotiator, Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Trade Policy and Negotiations, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Kirsten Hillman

Thank you for your question.

As I said earlier, Canada joined the negotiations in the 15th round, following long consultations on the agreement and its overall content with all TPP countries.

I can say without hesitation that joining the negotiations when we did has not caused Canada any problems whatsoever for a fairly simple reason. Some of the TPP countries—such as Canada, the United States and Australia—have concluded in recent years rather modern free trade agreements that are largely inspired by one another.

We also have some other countries at the table, including Malaysia and Vietnam, which have less experience in that new type of agreement with chapters on labour, the environment, crown corporations, the protection of small and medium-sized companies and other kinds of more modern obligations or chapters.

Over the first few years of this negotiation—according to my understanding, as we had not yet joined the TPP—countries with greater experience in the negotiation of agreements more in line with the 21st century took the necessary time to teach countries with less experience in chapters on the environment, labour law, and so on. When Canada joined the negotiating table, those countries were still participating in the TPP.

11:20 a.m.

NDP

Marc-André Morin NDP Laurentides—Labelle, QC

Since our time is limited, I will move on to another question.

Canada has not always been entirely welcome in this partnership. Some participants had reservations about issues such as supply management.

What were the terms of entry when Canada joined the TPP? Can you provide some relevant examples?

11:20 a.m.

Canada's Chief Negotiator, Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Trade Policy and Negotiations, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Kirsten Hillman

No conditions were imposed on Canada when it joined the TPP.

11:20 a.m.

NDP

Marc-André Morin NDP Laurentides—Labelle, QC

How will Canada integrate the discussion chapters that were closed by the time it joined?

11:20 a.m.

Canada's Chief Negotiator, Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Trade Policy and Negotiations, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Kirsten Hillman

Canada joined the negotiations at the same time as Mexico, but before Japan. Malaysia joined before us, once the negotiations had already begun.

Every new country joining the TPP promised the other partners that it would not slow down the negotiations and would keep up the pace. Canada made that commitment, and I think that's warranted. So we had to prepare properly or, as we say in English,

we had to be ready to hit the ground running.

We committed to that. We are currently in negotiations.

All international trade negotiations share one specific principle. I will say it in English because I don't know how to render it in French.

We are negotiating what's called a single undertaking, and that means that the treaty itself is not concluded or any element of it concluded until the entire negotiation is concluded. So we joined. We said we would keep pace; we said we would keep up. We did. We are fully integrated and ultimately nothing in the negotiations is agreed until it's all agreed.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Keep it very short.

11:20 a.m.

NDP

Marc-André Morin NDP Laurentides—Labelle, QC

There's definitely a lot of work to be done. Could you tell me very briefly which chapters are considered to be resolved and which still need to be discussed?

11:20 a.m.

Canada's Chief Negotiator, Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Trade Policy and Negotiations, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Kirsten Hillman

It's a single undertaking, so, in a sense, nothing is done until it's all done.

We've made very good progress in a number of chapters: SPS chapter, TBT chapter, the small and medium-sized enterprises, and the labour chapter. There are a variety of chapters that are well advanced.

Some of the more challenging areas include some of the newest areas, so the chapter on state-owned enterprises is a bit more challenging because, for some of the countries around the table, it's quite new. The environment chapter for some countries is a bit more challenging. Intellectual property is a vast, vast, and technical area so that requires some more work. Then there are all of the areas of market access: services investment, government procurement, temporary entry, and financial services and goods. Those are also areas that we continue to try to move forward.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Thank you very much.

We'll now move to Mr. O'Toole for seven minutes.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Hillman and Ms. Theodore, for coming. It's very welcome to have some of our professional civil service members who are involved on the ground with these negotiations. We appreciate your time and your being here.

I do have to comment on my friend Mr. Morin who spoke positively about supporting trade and treaties that are good for Canada. Most MPs get bombarded with a lot of emails that really try to spread misinformation with respect to trade.

In fact, each of the NDP members of the trade committee sponsored these emails or are part of websites called MPs for Transparency and all of these things. So, having officials involved in the negotiations here to dispel the myth that there's some secret agenda happening is not only welcome.

The most recent email that all MPs received as part of these email campaigns said that “there is no justification for negotiating” with the countries of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. I think your presentation was helpful because you showed exactly why there's a justification for being at the table. I'm going to use my short period of time to talk about that justification and I'll be sending this exchange back to the forces, the Council of Canadians and others, who try to really cause mischief and misinformation.

Your second part, I think, was the most critical in terms of rule setting. This is a market of 800 million—give or take—consumers representing a significant portion of the world economy and, if we're not setting the rules of trade for the generation to come, Canada will be a loser and our economy will suffer.

I'd like to you to just talk a little bit more about the rule setting and if possible to talk about the services aspect to Canada's economy. Often we think of trade as selling cars or resources, those sorts of things, but services account for 70% of Canada's GDP and 14 million Canadian jobs. Modern trade agreements like the CETA and others take into consideration the exchange of services and professional mobility, those sorts of things. Could you speak about that as part of the rule-setting process for the TPP?

11:25 a.m.

Canada's Chief Negotiator, Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Trade Policy and Negotiations, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Kirsten Hillman

Yes, absolutely. I'd be very happy to.

I think on your first more general point around rule setting, what I'd like to pause on for a moment is the fact that the NAFTA and the WTO agreements are 20 years old. They are excellent agreements, the WTO at setting global standards, and the NAFTA being really the vehicle for our integration in North America and much of our prosperity and the establishment of North American platforms. They're very important agreements.

That said, as I was saying earlier, business has changed. The way in which we do business has changed. The digital economy has become much more important. Small and medium-sized enterprises are drivers of our economy. Emphasis on the kinds of rules that need to be put in place to help them is crucial.

For example, things such as lack of regulatory transparency, or having a licensing requirement in a foreign jurisdiction one day and having it changed the next day, can cause some of these small and medium-sized businesses such difficulty that they will retreat from international operations. Maybe they will operate in the United States, but further afield will be a little bit too precarious for them.

In terms of setting the terms of trade, of setting the rules for trade, our responsibility is to create the conditions under which these actors that are the creators of jobs in our country can grow, participate, and flourish, conditions such as regulatory transparency, regulatory predictability, lowering technical barriers, ensuring predictable and secure data flow, and ensuring appropriate protection of their innovation.

We've talked to a lot of businesses—the energy sector was one area—that create small tools and small implements that are used in the resource sector and have large markets in Asia. If as soon as they are sold they are retro-created, then their business, their innovation, and the value of that has been lost, so ensuring that those rules are in place and enforced in this region, and in this treaty as it expands to include other players in the region, is crucial for Canadians.

Did you want me to go on to services? I don't want to keep your—

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON

What's my time, Mr. Chair?

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

You have a minute and a half.

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON

I have a minute? I'll move to my next question, then, because we could go on forever but I have limited time.

I'm glad you mentioned small and medium-sized enterprises. I was at Viceroy Homes last week and I was amazed. They employ 200 people in Port Hope and 200 in Richmond, British Columbia. They're Unifor workers. They predict that with Korea and just Japan, which we are having bilateral talks with, they will double their workforce in the next five years. That's a medium-sized player that we don't often hear about but that will require the terms of trade to be open. I'm glad you used that term.

Please address this quickly. The absence of any trade agreement provides zero protection, whether it's on reducing tariffs, or non-tariff barriers, or intellectual property protection. Would it be fair to say that not having a protection promotion agreement in place, or an FTA, or a treaty, actually puts our people at a disadvantage when exporting?

11:30 a.m.

Canada's Chief Negotiator, Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Trade Policy and Negotiations, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Kirsten Hillman

Absolutely, and in two ways.

One, trade agreements set the rules and they enforce them, so we want to set rules that set the conditions under which our businesses can operate effectively and predictably. We want to set predictable open marketplaces, and we will offer a predictable open marketplace in return, right? That's the bargain we strike. Then the agreement has mechanisms to enforce those commitments we've made. That's the benefit of having it.

The challenge of not having it is, first, if you don't have it, those rules and the enforcement are not in place, but second, others may have it, so there's a competitive disadvantage. If we're not at the table but others are, or if we're not pursuing these opportunities but others are—and I can assure you that in the high-growth Asian markets everybody is interested—then we are at a further disadvantage, because not only do we not have the rules, but those who have them are taking advantage of benefits that we can't offer our businesses.

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON

Thank you.

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Thank you very much.

Mr. Pacetti.

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Massimo Pacetti Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Hillman and Ms. Theodore, thank you for appearing.

I have a lot of questions, so I guess I would start either at the beginning or at the end. I prefer starting at the end.

What are we looking to accomplish at the end? What is our ultimate goal? Is it just to have free trade in terms of no tariffs, point final, at the end of all this?

11:30 a.m.

Canada's Chief Negotiator, Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Trade Policy and Negotiations, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Kirsten Hillman

I guess I'd go back to my answer just a moment ago.

Fundamentally, there are two things that you seek to do in a trade agreement, and this one is no different. You seek to provide an operating environment for businesses that is predictable, that is open, and that is enforceable, so that the commitments that are made, for example, to regulatory transparency.... We take for granted posting regulations on a website, and when you change them, posting the change on a website. It doesn't exist in all the TPP countries, and that is a very big hindrance to businesses. That's just an example.