International Trade Committee on Feb. 25th, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I'm sorry, Mr. Hoback, but your time is up.

Mr. Dhaliwal.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank the presenters as well.

My first question is going to Washington, for Ms. Greenwood.

Ms. Greenwood, you said businesses love stability. I come from a small business background. It is my understanding that workers love stability as much as the businesses do. How do you feel that CUSMA will help not only businesses but also middle-class workers?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Ms. Greenwood?

I think there was a translation issue, or something, because it's showing in French rather than.... I think that's what the delay was.

Ms. Greenwood, did you hear the question?

[Maryscott Greenwood]

Madam Chair, I [Inaudible—Editor] French. I apologize.

If I could hear the question in English, I'd be happy to answer.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I think something happened to our system, because I have French here rather than English, and I don't know why.

Let's do a restart here. It was only a minute and 22 seconds anyway, so we're going to start again.

[Maryscott Greenwood]

I apologize. It's my fault.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

It's not your fault.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

No, it's not. We had a bit of a problem on our end.

Please start again, Mr. Dhaliwal.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the presenters.

My question goes to you, Ms. Greenwood. You said that businesses love stability.

I come from a small business background, being a professional engineer, a land surveyor and into land development. I personally see that the workers love stability as much as businesses do. Do you agree with that?

The second question will be, how would this agreement help the middle-class workers, not only the businesses?

[Maryscott Greenwood]

Absolutely.

To your first question, absolutely, workers love stability as much as business owners do. We all have to figure out how we're going to balance our chequebook at the end of the day. We have to figure out how we're going to pay our bills, pay for our kids to go to college—and, in the United States, pay for health care. Certainty an ability to predict that you're going to be able to make it through to the end of the month and pay your bills is absolutely important to everybody, to every family—workers, ranchers, farmers, you name it.

In terms of how it benefits workers, in addition to business owners, it's interesting to note that for the first time in our modern history, the AFL-CIO, the big umbrella trade union in the United States, came out in favour of the USMCA, the new NAFTA. I also note that there are representatives of workers in Canada, including Mr. Jerry Dias, who have been strong proponents all along.

Whether it's for large manufacturers of automobiles, which is a huge part of our economy in Canada, the United States and Mexico, or some mom-and-pop shops, there is benefit, absolutely, to not only knowing what the rules of the road are, but also knowing how you address a dispute if you have one, which this agreement also has—at Canada's insistence, I would add. But it's just knowing what your cost of inputs are and that you're going to be able to keep doing what you do at the end of each month.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Thank you.

My next question goes to Mr. Milliard. You said that SMEs don't take full advantage of all these agreements and they need to be aware of the advantages they have. Could you elaborate on some of the things government should be doing, and you as an organization representing small businesses should be doing, so that the small and medium-sized businesses can take full advantage of CUSMA?

[Kathy Megyery, Vice-President, Strategy and Economic Affairs, Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec]

Thank you for your question.

For businesses big and small in Quebec, the United States is usually their first export market. Two-thirds of Quebec's exports go to the U.S., so it's important that all small and medium-size businesses, not just large sophisticated companies, be able to take advantage.

In order for that to happen, we are recommending that the government do a better job of supporting small and medium-size businesses by helping them understand the business opportunities available to them. They often don't know in which parts of the country those opportunities lie. We are also recommending financial support to help those businesses as they endeavour to break into new markets, something that is often new to them.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Thank you.

My next question is for the music publishers. It is my understanding that CUSMA is an agreement that has protected cultural communities throughout Quebec and British Columbia. Could you elaborate? Do you agree with that?

[Gilles Daigle]

In respect of the particular issue that is of concern to us, which first and foremost is term extension, CUSMA does; the implementation legislation, Bill C-4, does not, or at least it does not today. It is not acceptable to our constituency that we have to wait perhaps as long as two and a half years, because, as I don't have to tell this group, in politics and in government a lot could happen that could potentially change that obligation.

In a response to Mr. Hoback, I started talking about the fact that we've been told on so many occasions that the extension was going to be implemented. In 2012, it didn't happen. For the TPP, the extension was in the draft text. Canada pulled it. We now get to the new NAFTA. It's in CUSMA, but not right away. We're going to take as long as two and a half years to implement it. Why?

The message it sends to our members and to Ms. Mitchell as a publisher is “Your music is not as worthy of protection, the longer protection, as that of your peers.” In the U.S., Bruce Springsteen's works are protected for 70 years. For Bryan Adams and Jim Vallance, it's 50 years. In Canada, we are not prepared to make that change today. We're going to see if we can do it in the next two and a half years. That's not good enough for our members anymore. We've heard that too many times. I'm sure that Ms. Mitchell, as a publisher, would probably have some thoughts on that as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Mr. Daigle.

Mr. Savard-Tremblay.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

I, too, would like to thank all the witnesses for their varied and relevant comments.

My question is for the FCCQ representatives. I think the picture they've painted thus far is consistent with how the Bloc Québécois sees the situation. Far from being anti-free trade, we nevertheless believe the agreement, as it stands, contains some irritants.

You did a good job of explaining that, contrary to repeated statements, the agreement does not treat aluminum and steel in the same way, and that the bulk of the aluminum sector is in Quebec, unlike the steel sector, which is concentrated in Ontario.

You also brought up supply management and the fact that it took a beating further to the negotiations, as with so many negotiations in the past. You talked about the importance of swift and adequate compensation. That brings me to my question, since you are still in favour of ratifying the final agreement.

Yesterday, we heard from the Dairy Farmers of Canada, and I asked its representatives about an appropriate ratification date. They said no earlier than May 1, to comply with the coming into force date of three months, which would take us to August 1, the beginning of the fiscal year in the dairy sector.

Is there a particular date you would prefer, or do you also think it's urgent and should be done swiftly?

[Kathy Megyery]

You summed up our comments well. Indeed, it's not an ideal agreement, but it's the best one we were able to get. It's important that it be ratified in a timely manner, in other words, as quickly as possible, to put an end to the uncertainty hanging in the air. It's also important, of course, that the government put in place the necessary compensation programs for affected sectors, especially the aluminum industry and supply-managed sectors.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

I'd like you to tell me what you mean by “as quickly as possible”.

[Charles Milliard]

We mean the soonest that the current legislative process would allow. I think the feeling of urgency has to do with the compensation package. As we pointed out, compensation further to the other agreements was long in coming, and the payments even more so. Consequently, the feeling is that the compensation plan is urgently needed and must be implemented. As for the ratification of the agreement, it depends to some extent on how fast you work.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Believe me, we are doing our best. This week, we are spending 40 hours on it, and last week, we spent about 30 hours. Everything else has been put on hold.

Something else you talked about was the need to educate small and medium-size businesses, mainly. What form should that education take? What would be the right way to convey that information?

[Kathy Megyery]

As you are aware, we have trade commissioners in Quebec and in Canada. In Quebec, we strengthened their role in the world by giving them an increasingly economic mandate. We think that is an important way to reach out to businesses and help them better understand the opportunities available to them under trade agreements.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

I want to be sure I understand correctly. When you say that you gave trade commissioners an increasingly economic mandate, who are you referring to?

[Kathy Megyery]

I am referring to the commissioners that are active in various cities around the world.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

You're referring to Quebec's trade commissioners abroad.

[Kathy Megyery]

Precisely.