International Trade Committee on May 8th, 2018

[Bruce Christie]

We certainly didn't have that discussion in the context of the CPTPP negotiations, and that's outside the area of what I do for a living.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

All right. I'm just concerned that it could be another non-tariff barrier.

In my understanding, with the original TPP, pretty much all of the auto companies did sign onto that agreement or factored into the original agreement. Is that right? The Detroit Three were more in tune with that one, considering that was a renegotiation of NAFTA as well.

[Bruce Christie]

Do you mean the original TPP agreement?

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Yes.

[Bruce Christie]

I don't think we've ever received an endorsement from the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers'...in this agreement, or most agreements, because they are concerned about the impact of eliminating our automobile tariff.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

We're going to move to the NDP for three minutes. Ms. Ramsey, you have the floor.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Thank you.

I'd like to focus on labour mobility, and specifically the impacts of chapters 12 and 19 on Canada's building trades. There are some really serious concerns about the lack of language requirements. In fact, they've said there are no language requirements under CPTPP, meaning that workers who are on work sites here won't understand signals, safety language, things that are critical to health and safety on any job site.

In chapter 12, it also states that workers wanting to enter Canada must have a post-secondary degree of four years or more of study, but under the CPTPP there's nothing that validates that the training that this person has received meets any provincial standards.

My question is, do CBSA officials have the capacity to be able to check to ensure that these workers will meet our provincial standards?

[Bruce Christie]

Once a new trade agreement is entered into force for Canada, part of the implementation, as a result of the implementing legislation and the passing of new legislation into Canada, is that CBSA, among others, will have to be trained to recognize what the new requirements are.

When you change or amend your laws in Canada, all of our inspectors or officials at the border have to be trained in these new requirements.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Okay, because it says there is no requirement that migrant workers actually demonstrate the necessary skills to work in Canada. In the implementing legislation will there be a requirement that this is checked?

[Bruce Christie]

There's nothing in the implementing legislation at present. We'd have to check in the regulations and get back to you.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Okay, we can follow up.

Also, the occupations from the national occupational classification broadly cover positions in the construction industry, including supervisors and contractors. This listing is very vague and needs some updating.

What guarantee do Canadian workers have that those coming into Canada as contractors and supervisors will not actually be workers under a different name?

[Bruce Christie]

I have to defer your question. I don't have the specifics to answer your question but we'll be happy to follow up with you.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Okay. Thank you.

The other thing is migrant worker wage standards, which likely will have the same response. We're looking for some assurances and safeguards in place to guarantee that foreign workers are being paid what is in their contract with their employer. This is of significant concern. As you can imagine, this is the first trade agreement where our building trades are being impacted in this way, so it's a significant concern to workers on the ground and across our country.

I'm not sure if you can speak to the migrant worker wage standards or the provisions in CPTPP around that.

[Bruce Christie]

Again, this was part of the original negotiated agreement. I wish I had the specifics to answer your question today but we'll certainly respond to your questions in writing after this.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

We'll go over to the Liberals.

Mr. Fonseca, you have the floor.

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Christie, and to your team, for your professionalism.

I know that as governments we want to make sure you have all the tools and resources to be able to do your job effectively when we're negotiating these trade agreements. We know we want to get it right, because this agreement will go on for decades to come.

I think back to how this all started and how late the former Harper Conservative government was to the negotiating table. They were one of the last countries to the negotiating table. They left us at a disadvantage and didn't consult well with Canadians—

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

[Inaudible—Editor]

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

We're pushing for a deal to get done right away.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

You don't know what you're talking about. He doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Because we had the opportunity to consult with Canadians, and we elongated this process and we're getting it right, that gave us an advantage, then, when the United States decided not to join the agreement. Now we were in an advantageous position to be able to push forward with some of the progressive elements we wanted within the TPP that became the CPTPP.

Can you speak to that?

[Bruce Christie]

Sure. In terms of the progressive elements, according to our progressive trade agenda, we had limited options available to us when we commenced negotiations to suspend the provisions. We attempted to build consensus to add new chapters on trade and gender. We looked at opportunities to highlight the benefits to indigenous peoples, but there were already, in terms of labour and the environment and SMEs, three robust chapters in the original agreement so we felt we had those progressive elements well in hand.

We weren't able to build consensus among the remaining 10 parties to negotiate additional chapters in our progressive trade, specifically in gender—

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Can I speak to that?

There was so much anxiety by auto with regard to this deal. That's because the United States had signed side letters earlier, before Canada even came to the table. That chapter was closed, so we would not have that opportunity. By this process going on for a longer time, we were able to then get some of those side agreements done that were more advantageous to Canada, and to address some of those anxieties that we were hearing from many witnesses who came here to our committee.

Is that correct?

[Bruce Christie]

Yes. That's right.

I was just going to finish my thought.

What we did try to do is advance our progressive trade agenda and incorporate progressive elements into the agreement. We managed to do that by incorporating progressive elements into the preamble of the agreement. We attempted to sign side declarations with all members, one on the importance of ISDS and the benefits in there.

We also signed or announced a declaration on progressive and inclusive trade. We were only able to bring two other countries on board, Chile and New Zealand, but we used those vehicles and any other vehicles at our disposal to highlight the importance of progressive trade elements moving forward.