International Trade Committee on May 17th, 2016

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Oh, stop it, stop it.

[Derek Butler]

—in Canadian history, with huge ramifications all throughout Atlantic Canada. We're going through a period now when we see a changing ecosystem, and we have increasing abundance in the cod biomass, in northern cod. I think we'll be back to a commercial fishery in due course, in maybe three, five, or seven years. With that, we're going to see a declining of value in shellfish, as shellfish declines and groundfish comes back. The unit price of shellfish is much better, in terms of returns to the industry, to harvesters, and to producers than the unit value at this point of groundfish. We face challenges. The opportunity that TPP and CETA provide, for example, in these kinds of trade deals is to bring home more value in the industry right now. That will help us, I think, retool for the changes that will take place in terms of the changing ecosystem. We're going through a transition phase. It's going to be difficult for a period.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Butler. I'm out of time, but I do want to take you up on that dinner sometime. I'd love to have that conversation. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

We're looking forward to coming out in the fall.

Mr. Dhaliwal.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to Ms. Burridge and Mr. Butler.

In B.C., the leading agrifood export is seafood. How do you see a long-term job market expanding with the access to these nations through the TPP?

[Christina Burridge]

I'm not sure we'll see an increase in jobs. I think what we will see is an increase in better jobs.

Our goal as an industry is to operate on a year-round basis, not a seasonal basis. That's true for both fishermen and workers in processing plants. We certainly aim to operate between 40 and 50 weeks a year. In terms of new market opportunities, my colleague Derek spoke about the knock-on effects of getting new markets and their effect on the dynamics of existing trade. It will only create more secure, more long-term employment, even if the numbers don't particularly increase.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Would this expansion indirectly help other industries besides the fishing industry in British Columbia?

[Christina Burridge]

Certainly. There's a huge number of support industries, many of them in communities, often quite small communities, up and down the coast in terms of ice, in terms of transportation, and in terms of packaging. As well, obviously there's an impact for the port of Vancouver in particular, and for airlines operating out of YVR.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

You mentioned that if the U.S. ratifies, then we have to ratify. But what we're hearing across the border is that both Democrats and Republicans are not in favour of ratifying the TPP.

In your view, we should not to be in a rush to ratify this TPP, and it would be better to consult more industries, more people, and see what the election results are on the south side of the border?

[Christina Burridge]

I see Canada prepared to sign. It may be that a number of countries will choose to wait until after the U.S. election or to wait and see what happens with the U.S. If it so happens that TPP falls apart, I would urge Canada to immediately engage in bilateral negotiations with some of those countries in order to reduce tariffs and clarify rules of trade. I think there's a huge opportunity for us. We cannot be the country that gets left behind.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

In terms of other bilateral countries, we already have Japan and Vietnam as our markets. Who else do you see as a market that we should have a bilateral agreement with?

[Christina Burridge]

Even Japan and Vietnam still have high tariffs on seafood products. I'd like to see Canada engage directly with a view to eliminating those tariffs. In Japan there's really very little justification for those kind of tariffs, and Vietnam has absolutely taken off as an export market. Its people are increasingly affluent. If we can make our products 20% cheaper, then that's a whole new market for us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Thank you.

Ms. Ramsey, go ahead.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Thank you so much for your presentations. It is great to hear representation from both coasts, that's for sure.

I think one of my colleagues asked a question to Ms. Burridge around jobs and what would be created potentially in B.C. My question now goes to Mr. Butler in the same vein.

This committee has heard reports that we'll see 58,000 Canadian jobs lost in the TPP, and 0% growth. I hear that your industries are ones that would benefit from it. I think we hear that clearly this morning, that you are one of those sectors that would benefit. The concern then becomes how we would offset 58,000 jobs lost in other sectors.

Mr. Butler, can you tell us if jobs would be created, and if you've done an analysis around the amount of job growth you foresee for your industry?

[Derek Butler]

Oh, that's a really good question as well. You'll have to come down for dinner too.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

I would love to.

[Derek Butler]

I'd say the same thing as Christina has said. We've seen it take place in other countries. Iceland is one example. You might not see a direct increase in the number of jobs but in better jobs, better-paying jobs, longer-term jobs, and increases in the season.

In our sector, one of our challenges is that as we go down in shellfish, which is capital-intensive, we'll go up in groundfish, which is labour-intensive. Newfoundland has gone from having the youngest population in Canada and one of the highest per capita growth rates to the oldest population in Canada and I think the lowest birth rate of any jurisdiction, Canadian or American, by state or province. I checked that a number of years ago.

So we have challenges with respect to labour, as we go back to groundfish, because it takes so many people. It's quite a different industry from shrimp and snow crab, which are our principal industries. We'll see increases in employment, definitely.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

My second question is around the sanitary and the phytosanitary challenges. We've heard about this from other industries as well. Really, as I think you said well, Ms. Burridge, it's not often the tariffs that are the barriers—it's the non-tariff barriers.

You mentioned a whole bunch of species that you fish, such as crab, geoduck, and salmon. Can you speak specifically to the sanitary and phytosanitary challenges and the harmonization issues you have with the TPP countries we're looking at?

[Christina Burridge]

We have had issues with Japan recently, for instance, over lobster, and I believe with oysters from British Columbia. Those are the kinds of things that tend to take a long time to sort out, and then you end up with different rules from country to country.

I know that it is not directly one of the TPP countries but, for instance, we are an having issue with prawns to China and the use of certain kinds of additives. What is permitted in China, for instance, is not permitted in Japan. Those are the two main markets for that product, so we would hope that over time we would be able to have a consistent approach to those kinds of issues.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Can you tell us how you envision it happening in the TPP that those issues will be resolved?

[Christina Burridge]

I think it's because you have a forum for resolving those kinds of issues. It is possible to build a common approach based on, say, what's permitted under Codex. I think we can move to a point where the participating countries—and we would expect to see this happen over time—would take that kind of common approach.

[The Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Thank you.

That wraps up our morning here. I thank our witnesses from B.C. to Newfoundland. It's an important industry you have. I thank you for coming with your briefs and for the good dialogue we've had.

We welcome anything you want to send us. We're going to be working on this report for a few more months yet, and we'll send you a copy when we're done. Thank you for joining us this morning.

That ends the meeting. We're adjourned.