Madame Lapointe, five minutes.
Evidence of meeting #34 for International Trade in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was lot.
Evidence of meeting #34 for International Trade in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was lot.
9:50 a.m.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good morning and welcome to our witnesses.
Mr. Butler, earlier you said that the market for fish had doubled. You also indicated that 80% and 90% of fish were exported to other countries. Mr. Sullivan said he was hoping that the market would expand and that Newfoundland and Labrador's share would grow.
Since the idea is basically to remove tariffs, could you tell me how this could help the market grow, in your view?
9:50 a.m.
Executive Director, Association of Seafood Producers
Are you talking about kinds of fish or numbers?
9:50 a.m.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
I am talking about numbers.
Could that double or even triple the market or would it lead to stagnation?
9:50 a.m.
Executive Director, Association of Seafood Producers
That's a good question, but I will answer it in English.
9:55 a.m.
Liberal
9:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Association of Seafood Producers
It's a good question. We haven't done the particular analysis because it's absolutely so difficult to do. You could have no change in exports or values in returns from the TPP countries, but there could be, out of the 40, 50, 60 markets we sell in, impacts from other markets.
So we might see no change in respect of snow crab exports to Japan or to the United States—both in the TPP deal and two principal markets for snow crab—but maybe now we'll introduce opportunities to sell in Australia or some other jurisdiction, which might impact on returns.
It's really difficult to do a case analysis. There are so many different scenarios on what it might mean.
9:55 a.m.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Sullivan, earlier you talked about jobs. My understanding is that your company has about 700 employees, including 400 fishers.
In your view, if eliminating tariffs led to expanding the market, how would this affect the job opportunities in your company?
9:55 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Ocean Choice International L.P.
Can I respond in English?
9:55 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Ocean Choice International L.P.
We have 1,700 employees in Atlantic Canada, and we buy from over 1,400 independent fishermen. In responding to new trade agreements and opening up new areas, we always look for new ways to increase value. When you have more places to sell your product and more opportunities, it creates more leverage for companies that are selling in the market. If we have five new countries to sell to, and we're now selling a particular species in two or three, then we can spread that around, allocate some to each, and get the price up.
That's what I've seen in our industry. As we've expanded our trade agreements, we have more opportunities. We used to sell 70% or 80% to the U.S. market in the 1980s, and we didn't have other opportunities. The North American Free Trade Agreement, together with other trade agreements Canada has negotiated, have created more legs on the stool. We now have more leverage going to market. If you're going to a single market, you're not going to get the best price. But if you're going out to several markets, then you have leverage to tell them you're not going to sell them all your product, but you'll sell them a little bit if they give you a certain price.
From what I've seen in our business, that's really what's happened with these trade agreements. It's been a real opportunity to bring greater value back to our province and the country. That value gets shared among all the participants. Trade means higher prices for the fishermen, better opportunities for companies, and increased revenues for government as a result of higher incomes. It's a win-win, as we see it, and that's really what happens, because we have a finite supply of fish.
9:55 a.m.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Earlier, you said that culture and needs vary with the places to which you are exporting your products.
Are you ready to develop other markets?
I noticed that there was a lot of talk about frozen shrimp, live products and fresh products.
In your view, what is the best prospect?
We are talking about Asia. It's not next door.
9:55 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Ocean Choice International L.P.
This is a very good question. What we've seen with the Pacific region is that people eat fish very differently than we do. We're used to a boneless, skinless fillet or products like that. In Asia, quite commonly, people are eating the whole fish. In some countries, they want to see the eyes for the freshness. They serve it whole on a plate on something like a lazy susan.
As we've travelled, one thing we've learned is that if we want to get the maximum value from the limited resources we have, we have to be able to supply what the market wants. This is an opportunity. In Malaysia, for example, we sell a little bit of product, but there are high tariffs. We see opportunities to expand our product forms from what we're used to in North America and western Europe. We want to expand our horizons and sell products that will bring better value back to everybody.
Thank you.
9:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
Thank you, sir.
We're going to move on to the NDP.
Ms. Ramsay, go ahead.
9:55 a.m.
NDP
Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON
I think the difficulty in this agreement isn't the six chapters you two gentlemen are speaking about that would reduce tariff and non-tariff barriers so that you would be able to export more product and employ more people here in the province, I would presume. It really is about the other chapters, the 24 of them that have nothing to do with trade.
I want to ask you, Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Butler, if you support the initiatives in the intellectual property chapters.
10 a.m.
Executive Director, Association of Seafood Producers
Thank you for the question. It's obviously a complex one. It's a complex deal.
At the provincial level, we defer to the tariffs piece, which is the piece we look at in terms of selling—
10 a.m.
NDP
Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON
But specifically the intellectual property chapter: are you familiar with that chapter in the TPP?
10 a.m.
Executive Director, Association of Seafood Producers
I was going to address that. We would defer, in this instance, to our federal counterpart, the Fisheries Council of Canada, which is based in Ottawa. We'll attend meetings next week, for example. They keep a closer watch on all the other aspects, such as intellectual property rights, non-tariff trade barriers, and whatnot. They haven't red-flagged for us—
10 a.m.
NDP
Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON
I'm sorry, I'm going to have to interrupt you, only because we're short on time. I wanted Mr. Sullivan to tell me if he's familiar with the intellectual property chapter.
10 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Ocean Choice International L.P.
It's a similar answer to Derek's, to be honest with you.
10 a.m.
NDP
Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON
Fair enough.
This is the chapter that is really concerning to a lot of Canadians, because this chapter contains a provision that will extend drug patents and increase the cost of drugs to Canadians. I think someone in our earlier panel spoke to exactly this type of situation, where when you see the benefits and you're looking at it sector-specifically, you're taking a narrow view of an extremely huge piece of trade legislation, at 6,000 pages. I would venture a guess that neither of you would want to support increased drug costs for Newfoundland and Labrador people.
I'm going to ask our other participants, Mr. Kavanagh and Mr. Hynd, if they can elaborate on what the impact of increased drug costs would be to the people in Newfoundland and Labrador, and if it's similar to what we've heard in other provinces where people are already struggling under the high cost of drugs.
10 a.m.
Chair, St. John's Chapter, Council of Canadians
It's a good question. I'm glad you made the point about other aspects of the trade agreement.
That would be devastating for Newfoundland and Labrador. The bulk of our budget goes to health care. We are a province with an aging population, and a province where it is difficult to deliver health services because we're so spread out geographically. If we saw further increases in drugs, that would have a devastating impact on us being able to deliver health care to our citizens.
10 a.m.
Co-Chair, Social Justice Cooperative of Newfoundland and Labrador
I would just add that clearly there's a push. We are the only country that doesn't have a pharmacare program that does believe in public health, so again, there's a contradiction here. In one way, given that we're an aging population and given that we know the provinces are spending up to 40% of their budget on health care, we understand that any extra cost will be devastating.
We are already a province with a huge deficit, largely because of health care costs. We have to stop health care costs from increasing. To go down this road of allowing for increased patents will be troublesome. To allow pharmaceutical companies to sue us, after bypassing two Canadian courts, is another problem. There's $500 million on the table. That's a lot of money in this province.
10 a.m.
NDP
Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON
I think other chapters come up too. We've had a lot of open-mike sessions where we have a lot of Canadians come in. What they typically speak about are the ISDS provisions, the investor-state dispute settlement, which you've covered off, the cost of drugs, and the labour mobility chapter.
I have to ask you, Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Butler, if you're familiar with the labour mobility chapter and the implications for Canada in that.
10 a.m.
Executive Director, Association of Seafood Producers
I would give the same answer. I appreciate the question. It's very complex, as you can appreciate. We're here to speak on behalf of the seafood industry in support of the tariff reductions.