Thank you and good morning.
Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. Welcome to our beautiful province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
On behalf of the 65,000 working women and men and the affiliates that make up our federation, we'd like to thank the committee for the opportunity to express the important views of working people on the impact of a ratified TPP, not only on Newfoundland and Labrador but all across Canada.
We'd also like to acknowledge the recognition by this government of the need to have an open and transparent dialogue on the TPP, a trade agreement negotiated by the previous administration in secret, with only corporate interests at the table.
The history of international trade agreements negotiated by previous governments in Canada has rarely ever resulted in working people being better off, in our opinion. Areas such as health care, procurement, public services, labour laws, and wages have all been impacted by past trade agreements in a manner that has cost working Canadians and their families. These agreements have become less about trade and more about increasing the wealth and influence of corporations.
A substantial body of independent research points to the negligible positive outcomes that will flow from this agreement and the negative impacts that will be felt by workers, especially lower- and middle-income earners. These include a 2016 study from the C.D. Howe Institute, which predicts that the macroeconomic impact of the TPP on the Canadian economy would be a mere 0.068% growth in GDP by 2035. Perhaps even more interesting is that the study predicts only a 0.026% drop in GDP by 2035 if Canada does not ratify the TPP.
This mirrors the recent U.S. international trade commission study that showed that the TPP will increase the U.S. trade deficit and will have almost no positive impact on the U.S. economy. A Tufts University study also shows that Canada will actually suffer a net job loss across all sectors of 58,000 jobs if the TPP is put into effect, and that the problem of income inequality will be made worse.
The temporary entry commitments contained in the TPP cover a wider range of occupations in sectors than past trade deals. It also prohibits countries from applying any form of economic needs test or numerical quota, including labour market impact assessments. Therefore, employers hiring migrant workers under the TPP will be able to do so even in areas where unemployment is high and qualified local workers are available.
Furthermore, unlike the temporary foreign worker program, which can be reformed, the temporary entry system in the TPP cannot easily be altered once the treaty is ratified. Allowing multinational corporations to bypass the current regulations around assessing foreign workers does not contribute to a healthy labour market, and will only increase unemployment, suppress wages...and working conditions.
Due to the smaller size of the Newfoundland and Labrador labour market relative to most other provincial jurisdictions, the ability to absorb such numbers is challenging and the impact magnified. The collective impact on the national labour market would be significant as well, and would result in downward pressure on wages, higher unemployment, as well as higher inequality.
In addition to the impact on labour markets is the absence of any binding requirements that will see improvement in and increased protection of the rights of workers. As per chapter 19 of the agreement, employers are only required to comply with the labour laws and regulations in their own countries, however bad they are. The attempt in this part of the agreement to establish and promote labour rights actually serves to diminish the strength of Canadian labour laws.
While requiring parties to have laws governing minimum wages, hours of work, occupational health and safety, and unionization rights, the TPP is void of any minimum standards that govern these areas. Without any acceptable minimum standards, the recognition of the importance of workers' rights carries little weight.
The enforcement obligations are equally light. There would have to be a sustained failure to enforce labour measures over time to the point that it negatively affected trade and investment before any form of remedial action could be initiated.
When you compare this level of protection for workers with the investor-state dispute settlement at the disposal of corporations, it clearly shows how much the TPP is weighted towards the interest of corporations and not workers. This area of TPP accelerates lowering the floor for workers and the global race to the bottom, especially in the areas important to working people.
A highly problematic aspect of the TPP agreement is the inclusion of generous foreign investment protections enforced by the investor-state dispute mechanism. Giving international investors the right to seek compensation when public interest regulation interferes with their commercial objectives clearly weakens democracy. It restricts our ability to create and apply legislation that protects our standard and quality of life, as well as laws that govern occupational health and safety, labour standards, and even areas such as climate change and the environment.
Newfoundland and Labrador has seen the impact of this measure first-hand.