Evidence of meeting #104 for International Trade in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was agreement.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Sugar is one thing, but maple products are still...
10:15 a.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance
I am talking about sugar and all processed products, so that means all aspects of the rules of origin.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Maple products are produced in the northeastern America only. If there are consumers of maple sugar products in South America, sugar is not what they want. Maple products are quite different.
There is great interest in maple products in Europe. Since tariffs will be reduced, there could be growth in that market. The same is true of Asia. Japan is also a very important market for maple products.
My question is specifically about maple products and not about sugar. Sugar and maple products are quite different.
10:15 a.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance
No, they are not the same thing. You will have to talk to the maple product representatives then.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
10:15 a.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance
We represent just over 90% of the agri-food sector, but not them.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Okay, thank you.
The representative of the Brazil-Canada Chamber of Commerce said earlier that there is a problem with bureaucracy, primarily as regards Mercosur.
Are you aware of this whole bureaucracy problem?
10:15 a.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance
No, not right now.
In general, when free trade agreements come into force, and even before that in some cases, a certain number of non-trade barriers arise. That can even happen in the total absence of free trade agreements. One needs only to think of very large Asian countries, and I do not need to name them for you to know which ones I mean. Countries have different approaches and different reasons for adopting new regulations which can be seen as protectionist and as bureaucracy.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Thank you very much.
Mr. DiCaro, I have some questions for you.
You said earlier that Canada should clarify its expectations regarding market access. What exactly would you like us to clarify?
10:20 a.m.
National Representative, Unifor
I'm not sure that what I had said was specifically around market access clarifications, but more broadly speaking, I think it includes that.
One of the things that our experience with Canada's approach to trade negotiations...and I think they all sort of fall into this category. NAFTA may be a bit of an exception just because of how much public attention was shone on it. However, there is a clear absence of an articulated mandate going into these negotiations. I suppose our various lead negotiators, the negotiating team, and the federal government have a plan in place about some of their bottom line proposals, about some of the key areas they want to gain market access to and some social provisions they want to make progress on. However, that's not ever clear what that is, unlike other countries like the EU and like the U.S. to some degree.
One of the things that we've also consistently called for is a more transparent process and a clarity about what it is we are trying to achieve in this. Speaking from a civil society point of view, I think it would be helpful to know this and in a way, I think that it also serves as a more appropriate strategy because it sends a signal to our negotiating partners that Canada has very clear bottom line positions, and as in the case of NAFTA, it could come to pass that a lot of Canadians and a lot of Canadian organizations will rally behind that. Therefore, I think this is something that we want to see more of, but there's no sense that will happen in Mercosur, which is the spirit behind my comment.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
Thank you, Madam Lapointe.
We're going to move to the Liberals with the second round.
Mr. Peterson, you have five minutes.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our guests for being here with us again. I'm going to ask both guests the same question.
There was a public consultation period that ran from April 2017 to the end of May of last year. Did either of your organizations submit a brief or any input during that consultation period?
10:20 a.m.
National Representative, Unifor
That was a period where I believe the Canadian Labour Congress had submitted views. We don't submit views to every trade agreement going on and we weren't asked to be consulted, aside from the Canada Gazette notice, just to clarify that.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
You endorsed the CLC submission. Is that what I'm hearing, or did you input into that?
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
That's good to know. I know it's much broader than just the five minutes that you've had a chance to submit within today, so I wanted to make sure you were participating in the process from the get-go.
Madam Citeau, on that submission, I presume you took part in its formulation.
10:20 a.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance
It was not me personally because I was on maternity leave, but my replacement at the time did.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Are you familiar with it now? If I ask you questions about it, are you comfortable answering them?
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Did your organization do any economic analysis or take any look at what the lay of the land is now and how that would change if Mercosur came into effect? Was that the nature of your brief?