International Trade Committee on Sept. 25th, 2018

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Put an amendment on the floor. I'll support it.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Shall the title carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Shall the bill carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

On division.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Shall the chair report the bill to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Okay, folks. This is it, so off it goes to the big house and we'll take it from there. We'll see you at vote time.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

There's one more. Do we not have the reprinting of the bill?

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

There was no amendment, so we don't reprint it.

That is the end of this, but there was a request from a committee member that, since we have the officials here, perhaps they could stay another few minutes to take a couple of questions.

Ms. Ramsey, do you have a question for the officials?

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

I didn't get to ask this question the other day, so thank you for that.

I want to ask about supply-managed sectors. I want to just read out a couple of things I've received from the supply-managed sector around the CPTPP, and then I have a question specifically about the quota changes.

For the dairy sector, the Union des producteurs agricoles, when they spoke about the CPTPP, said, “We believe that dairy access concessions in the CPTPP are expected to be used almost entirely by New Zealand and Australia, given the U.S. withdrawal from the agreement. If so, implementing the agreement will have permanent impacts, including a perpetual loss of revenue for producers. The agreed-upon CPTPP market access concessions represent a loss of approximately 3.1% of dairy production or $160 million in revenue for producers.”

Of course, I have dairy farmers in my riding who are quite upset about this. I think about Bernard Nelson, Mark Stannard, Vicky Morrison and Lyle Hall, who's the president of our Essex Country Federation of Agriculture, who are extremely disappointed in the government on this move because of the losses.

I have a turkey farmer in my riding, Josh Mailloux, and the Turkey Farmers of Canada have been outspoken on this issue, saying that the import access to the Canadian turkey market is 71%, which will represent a “$270 million in lost farm cash receipts over the next 19 years—a farm output loss of at least 4.5 per cent.”

We have the Egg Farmers of Canada. Roger Pelissero, who's the chairman of Egg Farmers of Canada, said that once the CPTPP is fully implemented, “Canadian egg farmers will have lost the right to produce close to 291 million dozen eggs, with an additional 19 million dozen eggs added each year after the implementation phase. The total value of the trade deal represents close to $1 billion dollars in lost farm family income.”

I wonder if you can explain to us the quota we have given up in the CPTPP and what the government is going to do to support these farmers if that was a part of the negotiation. It existed under the previous Conservative government and disappeared under the Liberal government. I wonder if you can speak a bit to that process that dropped off under the current government and also to the quota changes they'll incur.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Ms. Ramsey, before they answer, it's a big question. It's up to the officials. If they want to respond in writing to this, I think we're okay with that too.

It's up to you. We have other things we'd like to do today, but go ahead. The floor is yours if you want to respond to that, or we can ask for a written response.

[Bruce Christie]

Maybe I will just provide some general reactions to the question, and then we can provide supplementary answers in written form.

Yes, under the CPTPP there will be limited market access across all supply-managed sectors through the form of 22 tariff rate quotas. These tariffs will be eliminated over 10 years through 11 equal installments. The figures that were used in terms of 3.1% market access are based on the United States' participation in the CPTPP, and as you know, the U.S. is no longer a part of this agreement.

In terms of the impact on all supply-managed sectors moving forward, the Government of Canada is engaged in consultations with all five pillars of supply-managed sectors, and we will continue to hold those discussions to determine what the potential impact will be on the implementation of the CPTPP legislation. Through those consultations, the government will define a path forward.

In terms of the specific impacts on some of the individual supply-managed sectors and products—turkey, eggs, broiler hatching eggs, dairy, cheese—we can provide more specific, written answers to the member's questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Thank you.

Unless there are any more questions from any of my colleagues, we're going to move on.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Will you allow me another question, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

I would appreciate it if you would make it short. That way they can get some time to answer.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

I can. Thank you.

This is about the side letter with Japan under auto. I think we discussed auto in the previous meeting. They are quite unhappy. It has been described by many, including the Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association, as useless, saying that the document will not help Canada gain access into the Japanese market.

I can read you a quote from Flavio Volpe, the head of that organization. He said:

...the Minister's drive to achieve another vanity trophy paid for by the regular people who work in Canada's auto sector is amazing to watch and I congratulate him on this ignominious achievement.

Another quote that I would like to read is from Jerry Dias, who is currently in negotiations around NAFTA. He said the side letters mean nothing and they are unenforceable. He said:

It's lollipops and rainbows. We've dealt with side letters in NAFTA which have proven to be inherently useless....

There is a call to draw attention to the fact that the side letter has no enforceability whatsoever. Across the North American auto sector, the Canadian auto sector, they are united in saying that they will not be able to get any reciprocal access to the Japanese auto market. In fact, the Canadian Labour Congress is united in its protest against it.

I will read a quote from the CLC president, Hassan Yussuff.

The way this new deal was suddenly announced, without any consultation or transparency, is undemocratic and flies in the face of the government's claims that it is standing up for workers in trade negotiations....

Can you answer—and I think it's a simple answer—as to whether the side letter is enforceable? It's yes or no, essentially.

[Bruce Christie]

The side letters that relate to the auto sector with Malaysia, Australia and Japan are fully enforceable through the dispute settlement chapter of the agreement.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Thank you, Mr. Christie.

That was your question, unless you want a little more clarification, Ms. Ramsey, because I did want everybody to get in.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

I would because I think that it has been studied quite widely, and there has never been a case brought in a side agreement that has been successful. I think about the Guatemala case in terms of labour. The provisions that we have been able to have written into side letters have never been effectively brought as cases.

While there is a thought that they can be, it has never actually played out that way. This is why I believe that when you look at the research around side letters, there is no enforceability happening because when they are brought under the investor state, or the ISDS, or whatever they are brought under, state to state, when they are challenged, they are never successful.

It's the track record of the success of those side letters that clearly, to these folks, tells them that they are useless.

[Bruce Christie]

We have never negotiated these types of side letters with the countries in the CPTPP before. We negotiated these legal instruments in order for them to be fully enforceable. We believe they are fully enforceable through the CPTPP's dispute settlement mechanism and through the deliberations of a panel that would be established to hear a complaint by one party over the failure to implement the obligations and commitments related to the side letters.

That was our intention, and that's our understanding, that once this agreement enters into force, the side letters will be fully enforceable through the dispute settlement mechanism. That was the purpose and intent behind the negotiation of those instruments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Thank you, Mr. Christie.

I know we just did clause-by-clause for the last few days, but this has been a long journey for our committee and Canadians. I think when Parliament resumed a couple of years ago, we started on TPP and I think it was one of the biggest studies. Our committee went to every province. We met many stakeholders. We had open mikes, so we had a lot of input. We had so many witnesses, and the emails that were received were in the tens of thousands.

I have to thank the committee for all the work and the Canadians who had input into this agreement. Thank you very much, everybody.

On that note, thank you to the officials for coming and helping us.

We're going to suspend just for two minutes so we can clear the room because we're going to do a little bit of future business in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]