International Trade Committee on May 29th, 2014

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

I think you know very well that presently there is litigation ongoing with respect to that agreement. I'm not going to comment on the litigation itself, because it's a matter before the courts, and I don't comment on matters before the courts.

However, I will say this. Our government is fully committed to bringing this agreement into force.

Again, I'm surprised that you would now be anxious to bring it into force, when in fact it was your party that opposed this agreement.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thanks, Mr. Minister. Again, we have concerns about the agreement. My question is just to try to find out why the government hasn't done it.

The Hupacasath First Nation, we know, have challenged the FIPA on the grounds that it could affect their rights and that there was no prior consultation in accordance with their constitutional rights. You've just confirmed that this is the reason your government is unable to proceed with it. It is holding up the deal.

So I want to turn to CETA. Considering that CETA is far larger than FIPA and has been called—I think you've called it—the most ambitious next-generation economic agreement ever negotiated by Canada, I'd like to know whether you have consulted first nations on CETA to ensure that it also won't be delayed and tied up for years in our court system.

Have those consultations taken place?

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you for that question.

First, let me respond to the point that CETA is so much bigger than FIPA. They're two very different instruments. The FIPA is a bilateral investment treaty; it is not a market access agreement. Of course, CETA is a market access agreement in many different respects, and it goes far beyond that.

In fact, you are correct in saying that it is a very large agreement. It is the most comprehensive trade agreement that Canada has ever signed, that the EU has ever signed. In fact, I would go so far as to say that this is the most comprehensive trade agreement anyone in the world has ever signed. It really does set the benchmark for the 21st century.

In terms of consultations, as I've said in the House before, the negotiations for a trade agreement with the EU have been the most collaborative, the most transparent negotiations we have ever undertaken. There were broad consultations, which went on for many years as this agreement was being negotiated. There were opportunities for anyone—

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Were the first nations consulted, Minister?

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

—in Canada to provide input. In fact, thousands of Canadians and organizations did provide input into our negotiations and informed the negotiations.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Minister, I have limited time. The question is whether there were negotiations with first nations. It's a narrow question.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Yes, and I'm telling you, first nations, like all other Canadians—

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Have been consulted?

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

—had full opportunity to provide their input into these negotiations.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thanks.

On CETA, Mr. Minister, you've talked before about how committed you are to transparency. What are the outstanding issues between Canada and the European Union currently, which remain outstanding and are holding up the conclusion of CETA right now? What are those issues?

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Davies, what is happening right now is that we are taking the agreement in principle that was signed in Brussels in October and we are converting it into a legal text. That legal text is expected to comprise at least 1,000 pages. That's just the English text. Of course it will be translated into other languages, including our other official language—

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Can I just clarify something, Minister? It's my understanding that there are still some substantive issues that are outstanding. It's not just at the text level that some beef quotas and pork quotas, and some rules of origin issues still remain to be discussed. Am I incorrect in that or are you saying that everything has been agreed and you're converting to legal text?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

We'll let the minister answer.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thanks. I'm sorry to interrupt.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Davies, all of the substantive issues have been resolved between Canada and the EU. What we are now doing is the technical work required to translate the agreement in principle into 1,000 pages of text.

Now, you're a lawyer. You know that this doesn't happen overnight and it has to be done carefully. You don't do this on the back of a napkin. You don't do it in the corner of a bar. You put in the time to get it done properly so that it reflects the agreement you made. We made an agreement in October. The substantive issues were all dealt with there. Now we're trying to put it into a legal text that actually reflects that agreement.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Very good.

Mr. Hoback, please.

The bells are ringing, so we'll close in a few minutes.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being here.

Minister, I want to compliment you. It's nice to see your enthusiasm and your passion for the job. It really shows in how you go about conducting yourself in the work you do, and I definitely hear that in talking to the business community and to people who have worked with you. I'd like to compliment you on that and wish you to keep it up, because you're doing a great job.

One thing that I think this committee has been lucky about was to be able to go to Peru—not as a committee but through ParlAmericas—where we toured a Canadian gold mine and saw exactly how they operate in the field. We learned about some of the issues around Peru and some of the human rights and growth issues they're facing.

What really was unfortunate was that this committee wanted to do a study on the Pacific Alliance and wanted to travel to the Pacific Alliance countries, and because of partisan NDP games in the House, they basically.... I'm not sure if it's because of the things that were going on in the House or in fact that they didn't want to hear the evidence of things that are happening in countries like Colombia because of trade agreements, but of course we couldn't travel.

I wonder if you could give us an overview of the Pacific Alliance, of exactly how we're interacting there and just what it means for the region, and why we need to be engaged, or, for sure, at least be at the table observing.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

I'll give you a short answer on the Pacific Alliance. The Pacific Alliance, of course, is a group of four countries—Chile, Peru, Colombia, and Mexico—that have established a strategic trading agreement and trading alliance, whereby essentially they have free trade among themselves. That is to be applauded, because Canada believes in trade liberalization.

We have strongly supported those efforts, and Canada is actually an observer at the Pacific Alliance table. We engage regularly with the Pacific Alliance. These are essentially our most trusted partners in Central and South America, so we work with them very closely.

I did want to talk about Peru. Peru is one of those countries, since you've mentioned it, that comes out of a difficult history. There were human rights abuses. It was a very poor country and still is fairly poor. Canada chose to engage. We negotiated a trade agreement with Peru several years ago. We've seen Peru make very significant strides, not only economically and in terms of trade flows and improving the prosperity of their citizens but also in the area of democracy and capacity building in terms of security. By the way, Canada continues to be a strategic partner with Peru in all of those areas.

I do note that the NDP opposed that trade agreement, yet when we see the tremendous progress that has been made since that agreement came into force, it is just more evidence that Canada's trade plan is working as we engage with countries like that.

I know that Minister Davies, or—

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Don Davies]

Thank you.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[A voice]

We're all allowed one mistake, Minister.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Yes.

I know that Mr. Davies has visited Peru recently, and I believe, came back with positive impressions. Again, it's an indicator that when we do trade right—when we do it right—and we focus on it being a true partnership, where we elevate our trading partner and we help them improve their economic outcomes, their democratic outcomes, and their human rights outcomes, everybody wins. Peru is just one example of that. There are many others I could mention.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

That's the spirit you take into every trade deal, is it not? It's not one of just business; it's one of actually improving the lives of individual citizens in each of the countries. Is that fair to say?

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

That's true.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

When we look at Colombia and what's happening there, I think that's another example you could look at where we've done a trade deal and the growth of the middle class and the numbers are very strong and reflective.

Would you comment more on how we engage and how we get Canadian companies to really look at these markets and actually get them engaged?