Evidence of meeting #4 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 tpp.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
No, not left out, but I believe it could be improved upon.
10 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters
Thank you.
We felt fairly well consulted throughout the process, both here in Ottawa as we were invited into sessions by ministers and department officials as well as across the country through consultation. There was lots of opportunity. As Perrin said, there are always ways to make things better, but through this process we always felt we were fairly included.
10 a.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
As far as the manufacturers were concerned, they felt they were part of the process.
10 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters
They didn't like some of the outcomes sometimes, but yes, we felt at least we had a voice at the table, absolutely.
10 a.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
When you talk about timing and ratification of this agreement—now there are different theories on that, of course—where do you feel Canada should be? In front leading, or should we be waiting and sitting in the corner? What do you guys think we should be doing?
10 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
Do you want me to take a shot at that, or Corinne do you want to?
10 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, National Affairs, Canadian Federation of Independent Business
Go ahead.
10 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
I think we should be leading. It's abundantly clear that in the United States this is becoming enmeshed in election-year politics. That's unfortunate, because it creates issues where otherwise there would not be key issues. My understanding is that Japan intends to go ahead and ratify. I think it would be useful for Canada to do the same.
I would hope that this committee, and that Parliament as a whole, would take the position that our policy is clear; we favour taking down barriers to trade with the world. We understand that any time there are trade negotiations it's a process of give and take, and the consultative process that we have should be focused on how we mitigate any of the downsides for sectors in Canada, as opposed to getting into discussions about whether we should go ahead at all.
10 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, National Affairs, Canadian Federation of Independent Business
I would agree. I think we need to take a lead on this.
I did want to comment on the last question about whether we were consulted. I would say we were probably not consulted as much as I would have liked, to be completely honest with you. We were brought in probably later on in the process when most of this had been completed. I just want to put that on the table.
It's not as if we felt we needed to be there right from the beginning, because as I said earlier we're not as focused on trade issues as some of these other organizations are; however, I think we would have liked to have seen a bit more consultation. I did want to add that to the mix, but I believe from the second question that we should be taking the lead, and I agree with everything Perrin said.
10 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters
We're probably a little bit more cautious on taking the lead than other business associations. Given the integrated nature of supply chains in manufacturing, the dominance of manufacturing in the export markets, if we get outside and ahead of our key trade partners, that negatively impacts integrated supply chains in manufacturing. That could impact trade not only in the GDP markets, but also—
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Could you not see the opposite when you do your two- or five-year planning, you're building a new facility, wouldn't you want to have some bankability as you're doing that planning to know where we're going to be, rather than waiting and watching?
10:05 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters
I think the preference for most manufacturers is still to do it in coordination with the U.S., rather than outside the U.S. just because of the integrated supply chains. I'm not saying that's not a valid point. I think that's the reality for most companies, given the integration.
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Moving on to intellectual property—we've heard some concerns on that—do you see anything on intellectual property in this agreement that's different from any previous agreements? Is there any concern there?
10:05 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
My answer would be a short one, not substantial differences from what exists today. What is striking to us as we look at it is how little will be required in changing Canadian domestic law. By and large it brings in an international regime that's consistent with what we have in Canada today.
I don't know whether Mr. Everson wanted to add to that.
10:05 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Policy, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
Yes, thank you.
There is almost no change to Canadian law as a result of TPP, an extension of authors' rights from 50 to 70 years, which at the Chamber of Commerce we would probably have supported anyway. We're very hawkish on IP.
There is, as you know, a big debate about whether or not the TPP is somehow letting us down in respect of crafting the innovation culture that we need. As we look at it, we don't see anything in TPP that speaks to that. Of course, the question is always going to come around. How does pulling out of TPP or failing to ratify it get you any further on that front? It clearly does not.
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Exactly. In your presentation you talked about creating that culture and mentoring. Where do your organizations, for example, the CME and the mentorship program, help your manufacturers get into a situation where they can be traders?
What are you guys doing as far as associations to take them to that next level to explore those opportunities that are created for them?
10:05 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters
I'll start with that.
We have launched several initiatives to help companies understand global opportunities, so we host, with the trade commissioner service on a weekly basis, conference calls with our members across the country, and frankly, anyone who wants to join the call, talking about new market opportunities.
We launched something last year, with the trade minister at the time, called Enterprise Canada Network, which is a direct link to business opportunities in the European market, but also goes beyond Europe into about 80 countries totally around the world.
We also lead a bunch of trade missions to key markets in conjunction with Global Affairs Canada. Throughout the year we'll run three or four of them, as well as technology visits to ensure the companies understand what other countries are doing in terms of supporting technology adoption and what is available out there in the market for them to adopt back here at home.
We're quite aggressive in terms of supporting those things, but again, much more could be done to help small companies out especially.
10:05 a.m.
Liberal
Peter Fonseca Liberal Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the presenters here today. They were very broad presentations from different areas of our economy.
I want to follow up on some of the things Mr. Hoback was bringing up in terms of the consultation process, and then from the consultation process into your own analysis. From the three of you, how did your members analyze the TPP?
What insight did you have, what opportunities were you given, and did you strike a committee or did you just survey your members? How exactly did you analyze the TPP and how would it be a good deal for Canada?
10:05 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, National Affairs, Canadian Federation of Independent Business
We have not specifically asked about TPP at this point. Most of the feedback we've received has been through.... We get about 28,000 phone calls a year from members on a variety of different subjects, so it's been coming in through that source.
We have surveyed on international trade, generally speaking, but we haven't specifically asked about TPP. Every time we've asked about free trade agreements in the past, our members have been strong supporters of free and fair trade. The concerns we've been raising are those concerns that have been raised individually by various business owners from across the country, so that's how we've been assessing as it's been going along.
As new information comes out, we do try to feed that back to our membership to find out what it is they're hearing. We have 109,000 members. We don't have committees. We don't have conferences. We try to get to them through the survey process, so it may be a little bit different and more spread out in that regard, and it can be a little more complicated to get their feedback right away.
My sense is that many smaller companies don't really know much about TPP or what's going on. Those that do will definitely give us their feedback and input, and we encourage them to do that.
10:10 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters
Similarly, we haven't surveyed either, but we've done many small round tables with members of Parliament, ministers, and officials across the country with our members, talking about TPP and other trade agreements to get their feedback, as well as conference calls with members and officials who are negotiating as the negotiation process is going on, so that our members could be informed and provide feedback. There is constant dialogue with our members. Any time there is a concern raised, we are able to feed that to the officials.
It's through multiple different channels on an ongoing basis through the development of the process as well as when the deal is ratified. It is fairly in-depth, face to face or over the phone, whatever way we could, to engage companies to ensure they were aware of the opportunities.
I agree with Corinne. The challenge is.... I bet that if you went out and polled companies, 90% of them would have no clue. Large sophisticated companies get it, they understand it, and they know what's going on. The vast majority of smaller companies in Canada would have no clue about what the deal is and what the impacts are despite, frankly, the best efforts from all of us and every other association's officials. It's a reality of small business that they're a bit disconnected.
10:10 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
We met with the negotiators periodically, probably as many as 10 times throughout the course of the negotiations, so we received briefings. They responded to questions that we had. We were in touch from time to time with the minister as well, directly, and with his office, so that we were kept apprised broadly of the direction in which things were going.
Obviously, an agreement like TPP is very detailed. It reaches into an enormous number of areas, and there were elements there that we weren't directly involved in, but directionally, yes, we were plugged in. I think the negotiators made an effort to reach out.
What have we done in addition to having our own expert scrutiny of the provisions of TPP? We also have an international trade committee with experts on it that we reach out to, and our policy is set at our AGM. It was literally just days before the election that delegates from across the country, from chambers across the country, came to strongly endorse the concept of TPP.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
Peter Fonseca Liberal Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON
Thank you.
One of the things that have come up often is talk about levelling the playing field. I can't recall who brought up that a principled and fair agreement is what we're looking for.
We've heard from the U.S., and we can't find that there's any consensus from the U.S., be it from Republicans, Democrats, congressmen, senators, etc., on this, but one thing that was brought up just recently was the concern about a currency devaluation by countries as developed as Japan, but also a Vietnam or a Malaysia. Do you have any thoughts on that in terms of the levelling of the playing field?
It doesn't have to necessarily be focused only on the currency devaluation concern, but about levelling of the playing field when it comes to our labour standards and other standards that we have in a very developed country like Canada, as opposed to some of the other countries that are a part of the agreement.
