Evidence of meeting #78 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 spirits.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Jan Westcott  President and Chief Executive Officer, Spirits Canada
Ainsley Butler  Representative, Ottawa Chapter, Organization of Women in International Trade
Marcela Mandeville  Director, Women's Enterprise Organizations of Canada
Alma Farias  Representative, Toronto Chapter, Organization of Women in International Trade
C.J. Helie  Executive Vice-President, Spirits Canada
Gus Van Harten  Professor of Law, Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, As an Individual
Julie Delahanty  Executive Director, Oxfam Canada
Aylin Lusi  Vice-President, Public Affairs, UPS Canada, United Parcel Service of America Inc.
Francesca Rhodes  Women's Rights Policy and Advocacy Specialist, Oxfam Canada
Raymond Bachand  Chief Negotiator for NAFTA for the Government of Quebec and Strategic Advisor for Norton Rose Fulbright
Pierre Marc Johnson  Senior Counsel, Lavery, de Billy, As an Individual

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

Thank you.

I think I'm right on time, Mr. Chair.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

You're exactly on time, Mr. Peterson. I'm impressed.

You have 10 seconds left. Do you want to give it to the NDP?

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

No, I'm fine.

4:45 p.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

That's good, everybody.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

We're going to move to the NDP now.

Ms. Ramsey, you have the floor.

4:45 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

I'll expand on Kyle's question.

This is NAFTA being presented today with UPS at the table. UPS brought a chapter 11 case against Canada and Canada Post. I think it's interesting that you're both here today.

My question will go back to you, Professor Van Harten. Could you finish your thoughts on how you think there really weren't significant changes or enough changes—and the NDP agrees—in ICS, that system in CETA, to change the end result, which is corporations suing our government? I'll let you expand on that.

4:45 p.m.

Professor of Law, Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, As an Individual

Dr. Gus Van Harten

On the independence point, there are a couple of gaps in the ICS. First, the members of the roster that was established still have a financial interest in the frequency of claims by foreign investors, so their remuneration is significantly dependent on one side bringing claims, which is not healthy for perceptions of independence in the process.

Second, they're not prohibited from working on the side as ISDS arbitrators under other treaties that allow for ISDS, some of which allow for entirely confidential ISDS proceedings. This means that even a disputing party before the ICS process has no way to reliably verify whether the roster member assigned to that party's case is working on the side or has worked on the side in a basically non-public arbitration process and has been paid lucratively in that context by an interested party. That's something that is easy to fix in the list of prohibited side activities, but for whatever reason was not in the CETA.

On fairness, there was a proposal in the original ICS proposal that the European Commission released in the context of the TTIP negotiations. About four months before the revised CETA text was made public, there was an article 23 that would have given a limited right of standing to third parties with an interest in the proceedings. That article, for reasons I'm not aware of, was removed from the CETA. From my point of view, someone, somewhere, consciously decided to keep ISDS unfair in its ICS iteration. That's a very precise failure of the ICS on the fairness point.

On domestic institutions and the duty to exhaust local remedies, CETA just doesn't incorporate that duty. It's a bit of a longer discussion as to why. It's the same thing with balance—

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

Perhaps you could send us a brief—as I know you often do—with some of those details. That would be fantastic. I do want to get in a question for Ms. Delahanty from Oxfam.

You were speaking with my colleague about the types of gendered assessments that could be applied. Are you aware of any of those being completed or of the government looking to complete some of those to craft the NAFTA chapter?

4:50 p.m.

Women's Rights Policy and Advocacy Specialist, Oxfam Canada

Francesca Rhodes

No, not the moment. We're not aware that there are any plans for those to be carried out. I know that they would carry out the usual gender-based analysis, but we think the assessment could probably go a lot further and look at a lot more detail.

Julie mentioned that UNCTAD, the United Nations centre for trade and development, has developed a tool box on gender and trade. It can be used to assess trade agreements before they're agreed to. It was recently applied to an EU agreement with east Africa on the gendered impact would be so that one could design what specific interventions should be designed around it.

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON

I think you make the point quite clearly that it shouldn't just be the gendered analysis, but that there should be a human rights lens applied to all trade going forward. It is positive that we see one group's issues being addressed, but it certainly should be broader. I wonder if there are any particular chapters in NAFTA in which you think that gender analysis should be a priority.

4:50 p.m.

Women's Rights Policy and Advocacy Specialist, Oxfam Canada

Francesca Rhodes

Certainly, the labour chapter is really important, since women's economic inequality is so prevalent throughout the world of work, and also because there's an opportunity with the labour chapter to have some language on gender that would be included in the binding part of the labour chapter. The opportunity would be to really expand and to dig down into what those types of revisions would look like if they had a gender lens applied to them. We could really use that labour chapter to have some specific language on pay equity, on equal pay for equal value, around parental leave, and on the provision of child care, for example.

There's also often language in labour chapters that refers to the ILO convention, which refers to the prevention of injury and illness at work. That could have a particular gendered lens when thinking about gender-based harassment at work, which women experience. Yes, particularly in the labour chapter, ensuring that there's strong gendered language in the binding part of the labour chapter would really strengthen the approach.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

Thank you. That wraps up your time.

We're going to the Liberals now. I understand that there's going to be a splitting of time.

Madam Lapointe, you have the floor first. Go ahead.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon.

We have been talking for a while about our different labour standards and about the renegotiation of NAFTA. Would the free trade agreement between Chile and Canada be a good starting point to renegotiate NAFTA?

4:50 p.m.

Executive Director, Oxfam Canada

Julie Delahanty

It's a good place to start, but it doesn't go far enough. I think that's the issue. There are some really good ideas in it, and some good initiatives, but it's totally voluntary.

I think in terms of making sure that some of the.... There's a provision for a committee. We need to make sure that committee has real things that they have to do and have to report back on. They would have to ensure that a gender analysis is done at the beginning of the agreement. They would have to ensure that it's reviewed. They would have to ensure that there's some kind of monitoring of it.

These are really baby steps when it comes to integrating gender equality, but given where we're at generally with international trade, the amount that we talk about in even having a gendered approach is still very.... It shouldn't be early. I've been working on this since the nineties, but we still have a long way to go.

I think it's just those things, like trying to make that chapter have more strength, and, as Francesca said, trying to integrate gender into some of the other chapters and into the other issues, and to make sure that in things like the labour chapter we have some binding provisions.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

You said earlier that there is a big salary gap between men and women in the three countries concerned. You referred to the methodology used to arrive at figures.

If we take NAFTA and the agreement between Chile and Canada as starting points, what improvements would you like to see?

4:55 p.m.

Executive Director, Oxfam Canada

Julie Delahanty

Maybe Francesca can answer on whether there actually is pay equity in the labour chapter.

4:55 p.m.

Women's Rights Policy and Advocacy Specialist, Oxfam Canada

Francesca Rhodes

In the Chile labour chapter?

4:55 p.m.

Executive Director, Oxfam Canada

4:55 p.m.

Women's Rights Policy and Advocacy Specialist, Oxfam Canada

Francesca Rhodes

I don't know if it's in the Chile labour chapter, but for NAFTA, we would propose to have the pay equity measures included in the labour chapter. You could use the national data from all three countries. You would have to choose which country—

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Are the various methodologies used in the United States, Mexico and Canada comparable? We could—

October 2nd, 2017 / 4:55 p.m.

Executive Director, Oxfam Canada

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Thank you.

I am going to give the rest of my time to Mr. Fonseca.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking

You have two and a half minutes left, so go ahead.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

Peter Fonseca Liberal Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON

Thank you, Madam Lapointe.

Chair, I'm actually going to try to blend a question between three of our presenters: Ms. Delahanty, Ms. Rhodes, and Ms. Lusi.

We were in the U.S. just last week. We were at the Johnson Controls company. They make 75% of the world's batteries. For the most part, those batteries are recycled. My question to them was around whether they lobbied for the environment chapter, because that environment chapter is good for their business. They're able to get more recycled batteries and to bring in better best practices. They hadn't.

My question is for Ms. Lusi, and it will be around this gender chapter.

Also, for Oxfam, are you trying to get the private sector to help in terms of your lobby effort?

I would think that, for UPS, the more customers you have, the more business you do it's all good. Would UPS lobby for bringing forward a gender chapter, for strengthening a gender chapter, or for bringing in those best practices? Is that something you bring to the table, Ms. Lusi?