International Trade Committee on May 8th, 2018

[Bruce Christie]

No.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

So nothing has changed on that front. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Thank you, Mr. Peterson.

That ends the first round. We're going to start the second round with the Liberals.

Madame Lapointe, you have the floor.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Good morning and welcome.

Thank you for being here. We have studied the TPP for more than a year. We now very much appreciate your being here to help us understand the differences between the CPTPP and the TPP.

Earlier, you talked about side letters. Could you elaborate on the cultural exemption? As francophones, the cultural side and everything related to it affects us a little more.

[Bruce Christie]

Thank you for the question.

The cultural sector is obviously very important to this agreement as well. We were restricted under the original TPP agreement. We were unable to implement any policies that would be discriminatory against foreign service providers or investors, in terms of developing Canadian cultural content. The other restriction that was in part of the original agreement had to do with restricting foreign access to online programming and the digital requirement. Through the cultural side letter that we signed with all parties, we removed those two restrictions.

At present, we don't implement policies in Canada that are discriminatory against foreign providers, nor do we tax foreign providers over and above what we do to Canadian providers, in terms of funding Canadian content in the cultural environment, but we wanted to maintain that policy flexibility, given the uncertainty of the future in this digital environment. Through the side letters, we now have reserved that right to impose those discriminatory practices, if we feel it is to the benefit of the Canadian cultural community.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you very much.

I know that the side letters were for all the countries. Have the 11 countries signed them?

Throughout our consultations on the TPP, one issue was a bit more contentious. It was about the dairy producers, but more specifically about supply management.

Could you tell us about that issue, but in relation to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Did people react well? What were their reservations or concerns?

[Bruce Christie]

The concerns of our supply management industries were that they we were opening the market in the original agreement and we opened the market by providing quotas to be filled for various dairy, poultry, and cheese products, which would lead to a further erosion of the supply management system. We've continued to defend the supply management system in Canada. Through the original TPP agreement, at the time, we had estimated that the market openings we agreed to, as a part of an overall balance of concessions, equated to roughly 3.25% of the annual production of dairy, poultry, cheese, and eggs in Canada. That figure is lower now, with the United States not being part of the agreement.

Yes, we feel that we did hear criticisms by the supply-managed sector, as we do from any sector when we open up the market to more competition. However, we feel that, especially in the initial agreement and given the pressure we were facing from the United States to make more market access concessions in those areas, the overall balance was one that serves all aspects of our agricultural community. As you know, that includes the tremendous export opportunities for our beef, pork, grains, cereals, and oilseed producers as well.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

We clearly heard what you just said. Clearly, if the U.S. is not involved, there will be less of a possibility that dairy producers in particular will see U.S. products on the market.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Thank you, Madam Lapointe.

We're going to move over to the member from Calgary Nose Hill.

Welcome to our committee.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

It's one of the most exciting, efficient, and productive committees—

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

It is exciting. Trade is exciting.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

It's the most exciting.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Article 18.46 was suspended, but if it was going to be reiterated at some point in the future—and I think that was a provision specifically related to the Americans, since they were kind of pushing for that more than anyone else—right now, my understanding is that we don't have law in Canada that would provide for patent extensions related to delays arising from examination at CIPO. What kind of legislation would Canada have to put on the floor, in order to be compliant with 18.46 in the future?

[Bruce Christie]

I don't have the specific answer to that question this morning. I think we would have to make that assessment when we arrive at that point. Concerning patent term adjustment provisions, we've suspended the obligation to enforce delays.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Would you be willing at some point in the future to table with the committee for our edification an assessment of the potential legislative requirements if the Americans at some point in the future were to re-enter the negotiations and this was something they were interested in, so that we could understand what sort of legislative paving of the way would need to be done to move forward with this?

[Bruce Christie]

Sure, absolutely.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

That's wonderful.

[Bruce Christie]

This would be something we would have to take on if the United States were to return to the agreement.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Right. Thank you.

This is a very simple question as well. Do you have any sense of when the government is going to introduce the implementing legislation?

[Bruce Christie]

We're working on the implementing legislation right now. It's a fairly onerous process. Our Department of Justice lawyers take the lead in drafting the legal bill, working in consultation with their counterparts in all relevant government departments.

We're making good progress on that work and are hoping to be in a position to table the bill expeditiously.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Would that be within the next year, pre-election?

[Bruce Christie]

I would have to say that's a political decision that will have to be taken. Our job is to prepare the bill so that it's ready to be tabled.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

We're hearing—I'm certainly hearing, as an Alberta MP—that some of our agricultural producers are worried about losing their first mover advantage in the market. Is that something you're hearing as well?

[Bruce Christie]

Absolutely.

It's very important to Canada to be among the first six or close to the first six countries that ratify this agreement. We are very closely monitoring what other countries are doing, and it looks at this point as though we could be in a position such that this agreement enters into force by January or February of next year with six parties. Canada is aiming for a similar time frame.