International Trade Committee on May 11th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Okay. Now we're going to move on to Mr. Peterson for the Liberal Party for five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I thank all of you for your presentations.

My questions are addressed to Ms. Lévesque and Mr. Dalcé.

According the Confédération des syndicats nationaux, “although some slight improvements were proposed to remedy some well-documented legal flaws in the [ISDS arbitration tribunals], none of them correct the wide array of flaws in this arbitration system which lacks transparency, accountability and independence”. According to Global Affairs Canada, however, “the chapter provides access to an independent international investor-state dispute settlement [ISDS] mechanism that is prompt, fair and transparent, and subject to appropriate safeguards”.

Can you suggest amendments that could improve the text of the TPP with regard to transparency, accountability and independence?

[Francine Lévesque]

We have not determined what those measures might be. A union organization does not tell its government that this or that point is missing.

We note that we are put before a fait accompli. The agreement cannot be modified at this time. It is a take-it-or-leave-it deal, it can only be ratified or rejected.

As for the arbitration mechanisms, we see that there are no recourse mechanisms. Commercial interests are the only thing taken into account. All of the other elements that are important to us, such as the rights of workers, human rights and the environment, are of no moment compared to the strictly commercial interests of the multinationals that may consider themselves threatened by political decisions that could be made.

That is the main problem in our opinion. That is why in the face of all this we think that there is no other option: our position is that you must not ratify the agreement.

[Jean Dalcé, Union Advisor, Confédération des syndicats nationaux]

All of the organizations share that opinion. One of the fundamental problems with this trade agreement is the broader investor-state dispute settlement mechanism. Why is this mechanism necessary if not to grant greater powers to multinationals at the expense of democratically elected governments?

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

I'm sorry.

Our translation is not working.

Sorry. Go ahead.

[Jean Dalcé]

Such a mechanism in a trade agreement makes no sense to us.

Countries like Canada, the United States or Japan are developed countries that have very mature legal systems. In that case, why have a mechanism that does not take legal systems into account? This makes no sense to us at all. In fact, we ask quite simply that this mechanism be removed from trade agreements.

One thing is remarkable. Although the environment has been a topic of discussion—our government went to Paris to sign an agreement—we are granting major rights to enterprises that will allow them to sue governments. If we consider our place in the world, and all of the environmental issues, we cannot grant all of these rights to multinationals through trade agreements.

Certain sectors should be protected in these agreements, moreover. I am thinking of Quebec, and culture. We are negotiating on issues regarding which we do not even have a national position yet. I am referring, for instance, to the telecommunications or electronic trade sectors. We are negotiating in these sectors, while in reality the debates have not yet been held on issues that will affect more than democracy, at both the federal and provincial levels. Take for example the media sector or that of culture. These are particularly important to Quebec. We think that these areas should not have been included in the TPP.

For all of these reasons, we think that Canada must not ratify this agreement.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Thank you.

You have half a minute.

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

I have a couple of questions for the Québec Port Authority.

With the TPP and the expanded trade that might come out of your port passing through the Panama Canal into the TPP countries, as you said, have you quantified the number of jobs that might create in the Quebec area?

[Patrick Robitaille]

No. It's tough to give a specific number of jobs, because it depends on the projects that will happen once it's signed, the economic context, and the price of commodities. The answer depends on many factors.

Certainly trade is the lifeblood of the Port of Québec's activities. Any agreement that facilitates or encourages more trade between countries with which we already do business is a good thing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Peterson.

The first round is done. We'll move on to the second round. The Liberals are going to start off.

Ms. Ludwig, go ahead. You have five minutes.

[Karen Ludwig, Liberal, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Good morning. Thank you very much for your presentations.

I would say the common theme I've heard from all speakers this morning is that you do support trade. I'm wondering if you could give me an example of a trade agreement that did work for Canada.

[Mathieu Vick]

We haven't looked into specific free trade agreements. It's more of a general thing.

If similar agreements such as CETA and the TPP are so important to improve our international trade success, how is it that the more agreements we sign, as we have done over the past 10 years, the worse our economic record and our balance of trade get?

Canada has signed many agreements over the past 10 years, such as agreements on investments. However, the gap between declining exports and growing imports continues to widen. We have a...

[Karen Ludwig, Liberal, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

I'm going to keep going, because we only have a few minutes.

Has there been any agreement or partnership that has been a good agreement from the union perspective ?

[Normand Pépin, Union Advisor - Research, Centrale des syndicats démocratiques]

The short answer is no. However, some of the biggest advocates of free trade will say that NAFTA was very profitable for Canada. I challenge these people to prove that it was not the drop in the value of the Canadian dollar that improved trade, much more so than NAFTA itself. These things happened together, but the fact that the Canadian dollar was at 70¢ allowed us to export massively to the United States. However, when the dollar's value increased, we saw the result. And yet the free trade agreement was still in effect. So it was not that agreement that created those conditions.

[Karen Ludwig, Liberal, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Over the last three years, when the Canadian dollar has been low, has there been a significant increase in trade? You're suggesting that as the Canadian dollar dropped, trade has increased. Many would argue that trade does not rely solely on the rise and fall of the Canadian dollar. Has it increased when the dollar has been low over the last three years?

[Normand Pépin]

In my opinion, the period was too short to have an effect like that. The Canadian dollar was weak for about fifteen years, then it increased in value. When it got stronger, trade took a nosedive. To my knowledge, it has not picked up again.

[Karen Ludwig, Liberal, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Thank you.

My next question is to the Québec Port Authority.

You noted in your presentation that 13,000 jobs are attributed to the port authority. How many of those jobs are unionized?

[Patrick Robitaille]

That's a tough one. I can't answer exactly, because the 13,000 jobs are direct and indirect. There are about 8,000 in the region. There are a lot of jobs in the services area, in transportation, rail, and shipping. Dock workers are among them; they are unionized.

However, it's tough to give a percentage. I wouldn't comment on that.

[Karen Ludwig, Liberal, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Thank you.

Could you attribute any trade agreement to the increase in shipping with the Québec Port Authority?

[Patrick Robitaille]

Again, it's tough to specifically mention one trade agreement versus another. Those are general conditions. Trade agreements help...I'll switch to French, if you don't mind.

Trade agreements encourage trade. When agreements are signed between countries and there is business to be done, the process is improved.

As we said a little earlier, what goes through the port of Quebec is generally neither produced nor consumed in Quebec. It comes from industries that are located all over Canada or North America. The products transit through Quebec on their way to Europe or to any of about fifty countries. The same thing applies to imports. All of these conditions come together. As I already mentioned, it depends on the price of commodities, ocean freight rates and several other factors, not just one. However, the cornerstone of all this are the agreements; we need agreements.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

That's it for your time.

We're going to move over to the Conservatives for five minutes.

Please go ahead, Mr. Lebel.

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am a substitute member of the committee.My colleagues who are permanent members and my neighbour to the right, Mr. Hoback, were telling me that the previous government had done a similar study. I want to refer to what Ms. Lévesque said. The Liberals are holding consultations when the agreement has been signed, and one wonders why. Before it was signed, a Canada-wide consultation of union representatives was conducted. The previous government consulted people throughout the country as a sort of preliminary study, before the agreement was signed. You may not have been here, but there was a Canada-wide consultation.

It is easy to say that the agreements have not been profitable. The game that is being played on the world stage at this time is completely different. We have to be honest and see what China and India contribute. Canada does not have agreements with these countries, but it trades with them on a regular basis. How would not signing the accord have affected Canada? That interests me more than knowing that the figures have not increased even though we had agreements.

I would now like to talk about the port of Quebec, where I had the honour of announcing a $60-million investment on behalf of the previous government. I don't want to put you in an awkward position with the current government. I simply want to say that I hope the Prime Minister will follow through on his commitment. He said he would respect Canada's prior commitments, and I hope the money will be invested quickly.

This morning Mr. Aubut, from the Quebec City Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said that insurance and tourism account for 40% of the local economy.

Regarding tourism, the Conservative government had announced that it would support you in the improvement of cruise ship terminals. We know that there are a growing number of Asian tourists who come to Quebec, which is known for its European-style beauty, but is located in America. How important is it for you that these projects be realized?

[Alain Sans Cartier]

As my colleague said in the beginning, the Port of Quebec has a relatively small domestic market. So international trade is clearly important. That's also true when it comes to international cruise ships. The key is to have good infrastructure to be able to develop that international trade. Without adequate infrastructure, we won't be able to carry out the Beauport 2020 project you talked about, Mr. Lebel. That project to expand the Port of Quebec was implemented to be able to develop and generate new trade with other countries. The Port of Quebec is currently operating at full capacity.

As for the cruise ship terminal, the Port of Quebec is a popular destination for international cruise ships on the St. Lawrence. Quebec City welcomes the most cruise ship passengers. Last year, more than 170,000 visitors arrived during the September to October season. We have a project to expand our cruise ship terminal because that sector has been experiencing continued growth over the last decade. The entire Quebec City community believes that, in another decade, we could double that clientele, and the proposed expansion of the cruise ship terminal will make it possible to accommodate the visitors.

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Sans Cartier.

A very important element for me is the workforce. Like you, I am very sensitive to that issue. I had the pleasure of meeting many Quebec City companies, which told me that they could not develop owing to a shortage of workers. With an unemployment rate of 5% and people who are often unskilled, there should be a balance between the needs and workers' qualifications. A catastrophe was forecast in terms of employment insurance. However, the figures that are coming out show that the situation has not turned out as expected.

I am now turning to the union representatives. What advice would you give to government officials? For the Quebec City region, how should this workforce issue be viewed? What would be your solution? It would have to respect provincial jurisdiction, obviously. The development of businesses is important to us. What are your thoughts on the issue?

[Francine Lévesque]

We think it is very important to develop a vision of economic development that is not strictly built on the extraction of raw materials, but also on processing.

What distinguishes Canada is a qualified workforce. We have many ways to provide on-the-job training to help the workforce continue to develop and process materials. That will help ensure even more value added and develop trade involving manufactured products. That will be more beneficial than just sending our raw materials elsewhere for processing, just to have them come back and then sent abroad.

We expect our governments to establish policies in those areas. We have to develop a vision of economic development based on processing and the manufacturing industry, and promote our leading sectors, which are numerous. We also have to make sure that our economic agreements will not lead to job losses.

A recent U.S. study notes that, with agreements such as the one on the table, Canada could end up with an employment shortage of up to 60,000 jobs. We cannot afford to lose them, as they are quality jobs.