Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I am very pleased to comment this afternoon on the positive effects of the Global Markets Action Plan.
My comments are going to be a little more general, about the objectives of the markets action plan and what we've seen since the adoption of the plan. In many ways I agree with what Ailish Campbell has presented; if anything, it ties the issues around our air agreements more broadly to policy or trade negotiating objectives and to the interests of business as well as to other activities and initiatives and policy programs across the government.
I'm pleased to be here to comment not only as the head of Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters but also as a former member of the advisory committee for the Minister of International Trade in the formation of the GMAP.
I think the plan has accomplished a number of the objectives that we set out for it. First of all, it clearly emphasizes the importance of exports and of international business more generally and sees these as a critical engine of growth for the Canadian economy and a mainstay of competitiveness for Canadian business.
This is an important point, because we're not just talking about imports and exports any more. Business today is global in nature. Our agreements recognize that more than ever. The CETA, for example, sets a standard for 21st century trade agreements, I think, but it addresses an awful lot of issues other than import and export tariffs, issues such as the movement of people, standards, services, and investment. This is critical today.
The key point here is that business depends on the movement not only of cargo but of people, and those people are moving internationally today. As we assess the progress we're making on our air transport agreements, it's important to put that progress in the context of the global nature of business and of how important it is.
Second, the GMAP identifies the geographic and sectoral markets that are the most promising for Canadian companies as well as the support strategies that are most appropriate for the government to pursue in each case. The plan has been criticized by some on the grounds that it sets too many priorities. I don't see that. I think it responds to the changing nature of business and to business priorities that businesses set themselves.
Certainly, as Ailish was pointing out, the United States will continue to be Canada's most important trading partner, business partner. lt is the world's largest, richest, most dynamic economy, one of the riskiest of all markets to do business in. It's the economy in which Canadian businesses are most integrated in terms of their supply chains, their investment relationships, and also their personal relationships. We need a specific strategy for our economic relationship with the United States. That, I think, is clearly articulated in the global markets action plan.
Canada's economic and trading relationships with other countries, though, will be shaped by changing risks and opportunities, and they are continually evolving. GMAP identifies a number of priority markets based on input received from the business community, and it sets out a plan to better align the government's trade policy initiatives and trade support services to those business priorities.
The third and very important positive impact of the GMAP is alignment: the alignment of our trade negotiating objectives and the support services offered by government with business priorities themselves. Of course I would never want to say that business has one set of priorities, and it is always an art to try to align all of this. But I think the GMAP presents a very good framework for doing so.
That alignment has in turn, I think, brought about a far greater degree of coordination than I've ever seen between the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Development and other departments and between DFATD and the government's trade agencies—the Trade Commissioner Service, Export Development Canada, the Business Development Bank, and the Canadian Commercial Corporation.
Each of these agencies provides valuable and unique services to Canadian companies doing business in international markets, particularly to our small and medium-sized enterprises. Those are the companies that often lack the expertise, the experience, the resources themselves to tackle international markets profitably on their own. Far too often, these agencies are some of our best kept secrets here. The GMAP has shone a spotlight on the services they offer and the activities they undertake. That's one reason I'm glad that CME is partnering with all of these agencies in 20 forums across the country, bringing in small and medium-sized companies to promote not only the global markets action plan but also the business services that each of these agencies offers.
Finally, the GMAP sets an example for other organizations involved in supporting the international success of Canadian business. My organization is a good example. With the support of the Trade Commissioner Service, EDC, and the National Research Council, CME has launched the Enterprise Canada Network. This is an online service helping Canadian companies identify qualified leads for business and technology partnerships in international markets.
ECN works off a database of about 20,000 opportunities, offers, and requests that are posted on the site by small businesses in about 54 countries around the world. It's a pretty effective tool for Canadian companies to be able to identify qualified business opportunities. Since the launch in September, we've recorded about 26,000 visitors, have over 600 Canadian companies that have registered their interest in receiving these opportunities and we've already concluded 32 international partnerships.
It's not only with Europe. Actually, the United States is not really a very effective partner in this network and the network was established really to do business with Europe. I can tell you there's an awful lot of interest not only with Europe but with some of the other emerging markets that Ailish has already spoken about: Malaysia, Indonesia, certainly South Korea, Turkey, and Israel. These are good opportunities for business. More than ever before, Canadian companies are looking at taking advantage of those opportunities. Again, a network of their agreements that recognizes that interest response to that, I think, is crucial.
In order to grow, Canadian companies need to assess and take advantage of international business opportunities. I think the GMAP recognizes this and sets out a coordinated plan, not only to open markets and support Canadian businesses. It is a coordinated plan that allows for this continual review and continual alignment and coordination. There's a lot of work to be done. For instance, there needs to be better alignment of government departments with the objectives of our global markets action plan, making sure that government services continually evolve in line with the changing needs and challenges that businesses are facing.
From my perspective, the most important contribution of the GMAP is the focus it places—and quite correctly in my view—on the customer, on those Canadian businesses that are actively seeking new opportunities in international markets. To ensure that those priorities, in terms of the needs of business, are effectively communicated, not only within the department of international trade but in any other departments and other agencies across the country, is one mark of the success that we've already seen in the GMAP.
Thanks very much.