Evidence of meeting #74 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 relationship.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Steve Verheul  Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Trade Policy and Negotiation, and Chief Negotiator for the North American Free Trade Agreement, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Tim Sargent  Deputy Minister for International Trade, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Catherine Gosselin  Deputy Director, Trade Negotiations - North America (TNP), Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

10:10 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Good morning, everyone. What a crowd we have here today. I haven't seen so many people since a Bryan Adams concert. It must be a big show in town here today.

My name is Mark Eyking. I'm the chair of the trade committee, and on behalf of all our members, I welcome everybody who's here today and anybody who's covering this committee meeting and, of course, anybody who's out there watching us.

I'd also like to welcome the two ambassadors we have with us here today, the ambassador from Mexico and the ambassador from Taiwan.

Our committee is a very active committee. Of course, everybody knows that Canada is a trading nation, but over the last few years, since this Parliament, we've had a lot on our plate in dealing with the trade agreement with Europe, and the TPP, and right now our focus is on present and future relationships in North American trade with our trading partners, the United States and Mexico.

I have a few housekeeping things to mention. I know that we have a bigger crowd than usual, but we have translation here for you. If you are not sitting in one of those green chairs and you need translation, there are headphones in the back for you. I'd also just remind everybody that you are not allowed to take photographs during this meeting.

So, why are we meeting here in the middle of the summer? Well, this is a very important time for Canada, with the United States and Mexico, and we've invited the minister responsible for the United States, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, to be here today.

We welcome you, and I hear you've brought your officials here. You have been very busy, and we've come to know you very well. With the other trade agreements, you've been very gracious to be here any time we've needed you. So thank you for coming and I personally commend you for the team you're putting together for these future negotiations.

So without further ado, Minister, welcome. You have the floor.

10:10 a.m.

University—Rosedale Ontario

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs

Thank you very much, Mark, and I'd really like to thank the whole committee for being here. As Mark said, a Monday in the middle of August is not generally a time when intense committee hearings are held, and the fact that you've brought us together here I take as a sign of your really hard work and the real commitment that every member of this committee has to a great outcome for your constituents and Canadians in these talks. It's a privilege and an honour for me to be here to speak to you, and I want to thank everyone who is here. As Mark has pointed out, it's a pretty full room for a summertime committee meeting, which I also think speaks to how consequential these talks are for Canadians.

I'd like to make some opening remarks, and then I'd be happy to answer your questions.

I'd like to start by acknowledging that we're gathered on the traditional territory of the Algonquin.

Trade is about people. It's about creating the best possible conditions for growth, jobs, and prosperity for individuals and working families. That is why we are modernizing the North American Free Trade Agreement, known as NAFTA. That is why we are seizing this opportunity to make what is already a good agreement, even better. The North American free trade area is now the biggest economic zone in the world. Together, Canada, the United States, and Mexico account for a quarter of the world's GDP, with just 7% of its population.

Since 1994, trade among NAFTA partners has roughly tripled, making this a $19-trillion regional market representing 470 million consumers. Thanks to NAFTA, Canada's economy is 2.5% larger than it would otherwise be. It's as though Canada has been receiving a $20-billion cheque every year since NAFTA was ratified. Thanks to NAFTA, North America's economy is highly integrated, making our companies more competitive in the global marketplace and creating more jobs on our continent.

These historic NAFTA negotiations are to begin in two days. We're keen to get to work, not least because we know that uncertainty is never good for our economy.

At every opportunity we've explained to our southern friends—and many of you have been part of that effort—that Canada is the largest export market for two-thirds of U.S. states, and America's biggest overall customer by far. Indeed, Canada buys more from the U.S. than China, the U.K., and Japan combined. I think quite a few of us have uttered that sentence in recent months.

Our American partners have been listening. Today they understand, as we do, that our relationship, the greatest economic partnership in the world, is balanced and mutually beneficial. To wit, in 2016 Canada and the United States traded $635.1 billion U.S. in goods and services. That exchange was almost perfectly reciprocal. In fact, the United States ran a slight surplus with us of $8.1 billion U.S.—less than 1.5% of our total trade. So it's very, very balanced.

We've also been working energetically with our Mexican friends. I'd like to welcome the Mexican ambassador, my friend Dionisio, whose birthday we celebrated at lunch in Mexico City, together with the foreign minister and Minister of Economy and trade. The relationship has, of course, also included regular conversations between Prime Minister Trudeau and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto.

Most importantly, we have been listening to Canadians. As of today, we have sought and received more than 21,000 submissions of Canadians' views and concerns about NAFTA. That includes contributions from 16 academics and think tanks, 158 associations, and 55 businesses and corporations.

The Canadian objectives I will now outline are built on these extensive consultations. This process is just beginning. Our negotiations with our NAFTA partners will be informed by continuous consultations with Canadians.

Here are some of Canada's core objectives.

First, we aim to modernize NAFTA. The agreement is 23 years old. The global, North American, and Canadian economies have been transformed in that time by the technology revolution. NAFTA needs to address this in a way that will ensures that we will continue to have a vibrant and internationally competitive technology sector and that all sectors of our economy can reap the full benefits of the digital revolution.

Second, NAFTA should be made more progressive. We will be informed here by the ideas in CETA, the most progressive trade deal in history, launched by Conservatives and completed, proudly, by our government.

In particular, we can make NAFTA more progressive, first, by bringing strong labour safeguards into the core of the agreement; second, by integrating enhanced environmental provisions to ensure no NAFTA country weakens environmental protection to attract investment, for example, and to fully support efforts to address climate change; third, by adding a new chapter on gender rights, in keeping with our commitment to gender equality; fourth, by adding an indigenous chapter, in line with our commitment to improving our relationship with indigenous peoples; and, finally, by reforming the investor-state dispute settlement process, to ensure that governments have an unassailable right to regulate in the public interest.

One reason that these progressive elements are so important, in particular with respect to the environment and labour, is that they are how we guarantee that the modernized NAFTA will be not only an exemplary free trade deal, but also a fair trade deal. Canadians broadly support free trade. Their enthusiasm wavers, however, when trade agreements put our workers at an unfair disadvantage because of the high standards that we rightly demand. Instead, we must pursue progressive trade agreements that benefit all sides and help workers both at home and abroad enjoy higher wages and better conditions.

Third, this negotiation is a valuable opportunity to make life easier for business people on both sides of the border by cutting red tape and harmonizing regulations. We share the U.S. administration's desire to free our companies from needless bureaucracy, and this negotiation is a welcome chance to act on that goal.

Fourth, Canada will seek a freer market for government procurement, a significant accomplishment in CETA. Local-content provisions for major government contracts are political junk food, superficially appetizing, but unhealthy in the long run. Procurement liberalization can go hand in hand with further regulatory harmonization.

Fifth, we want to make the movement of professionals easier, which is increasingly critical to companies' ability to innovate across blended supply chains. NAFTA's chapter 16, which addresses temporary entry for business people, should be renewed and expanded to reflect the needs of our businesses. Here again, CETA provides a model.

Sixth, Canada will uphold and preserve elements in NAFTA that Canadians deem key to our national interest, including a process to ensure that anti-dumping and countervailing duties are only applied fairly when truly warranted; the exception in the agreement to preserve Canadian culture; and Canada's system of supply management.

In all of these discussions, we will come to the table with goodwill and Canada's characteristic ability and willingness to seek compromise and find win-win solutions. But we are committed to a good deal, not just any deal.

So, I would like to say to Canadians today what I will say to our negotiating partners on Wednesday: Our approach in these talks will be in keeping with our national character, hard-working, fact-based, cordial, and guided by the spirit of goodwill and the pursuit of compromise. We also know that there is no contradiction between being polite and being strong. It is no accident that hockey is our national sport.

These negotiations are a deeply serious and profoundly consequential moment for all of us. Trade deals always matter. Done right, they are a vehicle for helping to create more well-paid jobs for the middle class.

Preparing for these negotiations has already united us as a country. I've been astounded and moved by the extremely high level of support and collaboration I and my team have received from business, from labour, from civil society, from every level of government, and from many of you around this table even though we are not all members of the same political party. Time and again Canadians across the country have told me how proud they are to be Canadian at this moment in time and how committed they are to doing everything they can do to help in these consequential negotiations.

Our bipartisan NAFTA Council is evidence of this, and all Canadians are truly fortunate that in these talks we will be represented by the best trade negotiators in the world. Canada's trade officials are internationally renowned for their prowess, and it is a privilege for me to work with this outstanding team of Canadian public servants. Let me take this moment to acknowledge the great Canadians who are sitting alongside me and with whom the committee will have a chance to speak directly later on: Tim Sargent, our deputy minister for trade; Steve Verheul, our chief negotiator for CETA, who is very familiar to many people in this room; and Martin Moen, who is also working very hard on the softwood file in his spare time.

As I said, these talks are profoundly consequential. There may be some dramatic moments ahead, yet I am deeply optimistic about the final outcome.

That is due to this fundamental reality: the Canada-U.S. economic relationship is the most significant, mutually beneficial, and effective anywhere in the world. We know that, and our American neighbours know it too.

Based on those very strong economic fundamentals, I am essentially optimistic going into these negotiations. Together with this fantastic team of trade negotiators, we're going to work very hard and we're going to get a great deal for Canadians.

Thank you, and I'm happy now to take your questions.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Thank you, Minister.

Before I start, I'd like to welcome Parliamentary Secretary Leslie here. We also have two visiting members to our committee: Mr. Nater from Perth—Wellington and Madam Fortier from Ottawa—Vanier.

Welcome.

We're going to try to get everybody in, but the only way that's going to happen is if we keep everyone under five minutes, so keep your questions tight so the minister can have enough time to answer them. I don't want to have to cut off a member or the minister, but I'm going to try to keep it to five minutes so everybody can get a shot at this.

We're going to start with the Conservatives, and we have Mr. Hoback for five minutes.

Go ahead, sir.

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK

Thank you, Chair.

I appreciate your comments about keeping things tight. I'll do the best I can, but five minutes, with such a big topic....

The first thing, Minister, is that I want to compliment you. You put together a good team, with Steve Verheul and Martin and Tim. Putting Kirsten Hillman in the U.S., I think, has been a wise move and shows that we're focused on the file. So I can compliment you on that.

The second thing I also want to talk about is how we've been working together to make sure that the U.S. understands how important this relationship is and how all that has gone. I think the Americans now—at the governor level for sure—definitely understand what's at stake. I think after Trump gave his second notice of cancelling NAFTA that all of a sudden the business community, both in Canada and in the U.S., woke up and said, “Wait a minute, there's something very serious going on here.” That's what makes this so different from any other trade deal. This is a renegotiation. I think you comprehend the fact that this is the type of situation in which, if we don't get it right, things will actually go backwards instead of moving forward. I think what's concerning the business community is how we move forward.

I think I'm going to get a little bit into the process of consultations, what we're doing to make sure that we've consulted properly and that we're properly prepared, and then look at what we are doing while the negotiations are ongoing to make sure that we keep people actively informed on what is happening and what things are playing.

Then, Minister, I'd like to have some idea of the outcomes. What do we expect to achieve at the very end for the business community, so that when they look forward they can say, “You know what, after this deal is done, Canada is now even more competitive in the global marketplace and Canada is even better positioned to do more exports around the world because we've put everything together in a good NAFTA agreement”?

Five minutes is tight, so it will have to be very quick, and then I have a few more questions I'll ask later. Let's start off with the process. How are you going to interact with this council? How are businesses and other groups going to be able to interact with the negotiators while the negotiations are ongoing?

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

Thank you very much, Randy, for that, as usual, highly informed question.

I do want to start by thanking you personally for your work, and also thanking parties on the other side of the House. I really am grateful for the way that, particularly south of the border, we've been working together to advance Canadian national interests. I'm glad that you share with me acknowledging the excellence of our negotiators. It's true also that having Kirsten Hillman in Washington is an advantage. I'm not going to claim any credit for the excellence of our public service, particularly in that space.

I know that Gerry, sitting next to you, interacted a lot with Steve as agriculture minister.

I believe, Gerry, you won't contradict me when I say that we share—well, you might on some things—the highest regard for our trade negotiators. It's really, really important.

I just also want to pause on one thing that you mentioned, Randy, that I agree with very strongly. One of the particular aspects of this negotiation that is different from previous big deals Canada has been involved in is that it is not a greenfield negotiation. In a greenfield trade agreement, of course you want it to work because it has the possibility of bringing great benefit to Canadians. But as I said in my remarks this morning, this is more like renovating a house that you're still living in. That makes it a really delicate operation. A great deal of our economy is based on the existing NAFTA, and that is something that we heard in our consultations leading up to this moment. Canadians are very aware of that, and I want to assure the committee that I and the team are very aware of the delicacy of what we are engaged in.

You asked about the consultations, so let me start by saying that we've been focused on two things. One is working hard with our partners and raising their awareness.

We've been working hard with our Mexican partners, and I thank you, Dionisio, for being here. We've been focused very particularly on outreach to the U.S., which you've been a part of.

I just want to remind people that we've had 185 visits to the U.S. We've reached 300 U.S. decision-makers, 200 members of Congress, 50 governors and lieutenant-governors. On our outreach to Canadians, we've had more than 22,500 submissions from Canadians, as well as contributions from academics, think tanks, 158 associations, and 55 corporations.

As I said in my remarks earlier today, our intention is that the consultation with Canadians will be ongoing throughout the talks. The model here is very much like that for CETA, and that's why I'm turning to Steve. I think the CETA effort has an unprecedented number of stakeholder tables and ongoing consultations, and we're going to continue with that practice. Let me say that in those consultations, labour, environment, indigenous groups, and women will very much be included. I think people are aware of the NAFTA Council that we have set up.

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Thank you, Minister. I'm sorry but we have to move on.

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

Have I run out of time?

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Yes. We're going to move on to the Liberals now.

Madam Ludwig, you have the floor.

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

Karen Ludwig Liberal New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning. I'm very honoured to represent New Brunswick Southwest. Minister Freeland, as we've spoken about before, New Brunswick and Maine share a very special connection and relationship. Our relationship with border states is integral to the communities on both sides of the border. We are each other's closest partners and neighbours. When we talk about renegotiating and modernizing NAFTA to reflect the 21st century, what is Canada doing to ensure that our businesses can continue to work closely together and that trade barriers do not impede the flow of goods and services?

Thank you.

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

Thank you very much for the question.

All of us have a stake in trade and a great trading relationship with the United States, but for your New Brunswick constituency, I think the relationship is particularly engaged and important. The relationship between New Brunswick and Maine is absolutely essential. You know that 38,500 Maine jobs depend directly on trade with Canada, and Canada by far is Maine's largest export market.

As we're talking about the New Brunswick-Maine relationship, I do want to offer a particular shout-out to Governor LePage of Maine. I have been in close contact with him. I often speak with him on the phone. He is an influential voice in this administration and understands very, very well the intense and interconnected relationship between Maine and Canada. He understands it in detail. He happens to have a personal background in the forestry sector that really informs his point of view in a very useful way, and I have found him to be a fantastic advocate of the relationship and its importance for Maine. I have also found him, not solely in conversation with him but also in his advocacy in Washington, to be very good at explaining a key element of our economic relationship with the United States, which is that we build things together. That is a key element that can sometimes be missed. People can think of trade as something simply being made in one country and sold to another, but the Canadian and U.S. economies are so closely integrated that we actually make things together. An input is produced in Canada and sold to the United States. More work is done on that input. It goes across the border, and that happens over and over and over again in the course of the creation of so many products. We're familiar with that from the auto industry, from manufacturing, but it's also very true in New Brunswick's trade with the United States.

That is why your question is so important, because something that we have done successfully is to make it possible for us to have that kind of a closely integrated and very effective commercial relationship. A core objective for Canada is not only to maintain that relationship, but as I said in my remarks, to also use this negotiation as a real opportunity to make that kind of work even easier.

One of the things we have heard again and again in our consultations, including when I was in Edmonton on Friday speaking to people from the agricultural sector, is that cutting red tape and making it easier to trade is something that Canadians really really see as a concrete and useful outcome. Indeed, one useful thing that we have heard repeatedly from this U.S. administration, both in direct conversations and publicly, is the real desire to cut red tape to make it easier for businesses to do business.

I think that cutting red tape and making our economic connection even easier is going to be one of our chief goals and is something that Canadians across the country, very much including New Brunswick, are very keen for us to achieve.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Thank you very much.

We're going to move over to the NDP now.

Madam Ramsey, you have the floor.

10:30 a.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

Good morning, Minister.

I'm pleased to see today that Canadians finally have some understanding of the priorities of the Canadian government. I thank you for sharing some of those with us and I look forward to the further priorities you will reveal to Canadians as we move through this process. I welcome the negotiators to the table as well. It's nice to see all of you.

Like my colleague, I represent a border riding. Down in Essex in southwestern Ontario, you certainly don't have to look far to find people who understand NAFTA, including those who have felt the negative impacts of NAFTA in the manufacturing sector, and also businesses that have benefited from the flow of traffic across what I believe is the largest border crossing in Canada, the Ambassador Bridge, and soon to be Gordie Howe bridge.

My question for you is this. You mentioned supply management and the United States has of course released its long list of negotiating priorities, and from that list we know that the Trump administration will be taking aim at our supply-managed system.

Your Liberal government has eroded supply management under CETA and was attempting to do so in the TPP. I want you to be clear today: will you commit that you will not accept any further erosion of supply management through an expansion of tariff-free access for U.S. dairy, poultry, or eggs, or any other mechanism?

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

Thank you for the question.

It is a real service to Canada and to your constituents, Tracey, that you're on this committee, and I know that you know very well and that you represent a constituency that understands and is involved in this trading relationship as much as any part of our country is. I know you speak from a very informed place.

On supply management, as I have said repeatedly and as I said in our remarks today, our government is fully committed to supply management. There is something we have said both in public and in private to our American partners and it bears repeating today as an important point to underscore. That is about the balanced and mutually beneficial nature of Canada's overall trading relationship with the United States. It is truly reciprocal. When it comes to dairy, the United States sells us far more than we sell them. It is—

10:35 a.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

And yet they still want further access, so the question really is about whether we'll grant that.

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

And that is why it's important to point out to them, as we do both in private and in public, that when it comes to dairy, today the balance of trade is 5:1 in the U.S.'s favour. I would call that already a pretty good deal, and both I and my negotiators, who have great experience particularly in the agricultural sector, are very aware of that.

Something else that is very important, and that again we point out in public at the table and in our private conversations, is that when it comes to dairy, Canada has our system of supply management for supporting the interests of our producers. The U.S. clearly does not have supply management, but the U.S. has its own system for supporting dairy producers in the United States.

10:35 a.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

It has subsidization.

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

Dairy producers in the U.S. are beneficiaries of an extensive web of government supports. That is the reality as well. We remind our American partners of that fact when we enter into this conversation, but I think it's also worth pointing out to Canadians, because I have noticed that in some of the Canadian discussions—

10:35 a.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

I'm sorry. I don't want to interrupt you, but I have another question and I want to make sure I can get it in.

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

Okay, but let me, Tracey, just finish this.

10:35 a.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

Okay, you can finish this off.

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

I'm speaking now particularly to our journalist friends. Something that I feel may sometimes be missing from the public discourse in Canada is a full appreciation of the extent to which the U.S. dairy sector also benefits from an extensive network of subsidies. Their way of doing it is different from ours, but there are significant government supports.

10:35 a.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

My next question is around chapter 11. Canada is the most sued country under the investor-state dispute settlement provisions contained in NAFTA's chapter 11, which allows companies to sue governments over anything they think has reduced their profits. That includes taking aim at our environmental protections and health and safety. This threat of challenges under chapter 11 has had a very chilling effect at all levels of government—

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

You have only 15 seconds, so I think we should leave it to the minister.

10:35 a.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

Okay. My questions is this: will you seek to remove chapter 11 from the agreement?

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

As I said in my remarks earlier today, Canada takes a strong interest in improving and making more progressive investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms. That is something that we were very proud to push hard on in CETA and is definitely an area that we are interested in pursuing here. In particular, of paramount importance is preserving a sovereign, democratically elected government's right to regulate.