International Trade Committee on Dec. 4th, 2020

[Eddy Pérez]

Clearly, that would be ideal. For it to happen, however, we would have to ensure, as the sections on the environment, on sustainable development and on worker protection are being negotiated, that mechanisms to strengthen those measures be included. Mechanisms to settle certain disputes must be used if states do not live up to those measures.

As we can see in the CETA and the CUSMA, up to now, the so-called progressive chapters are actually extremely weak. The agreements provide for no tools that require compliance with those measures.

We are even seeing an inconsistency. The current text of the CUSMA contains no mechanisms to reinforce the chapters on the environment and on workers' rights. But, at the same time, the European Union is demanding to apply reinforcing measures on the United Kingdom. So the approach is inconsistent.

When we are at the stage of debating the agreement between Canada and the United Kingdom, I hope that we will be more focused on strengthening those chapters.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

I'm sorry, Mr. Savard-Tremblay. Your time is up.

Mr. Blaikie.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you very much.

I'd just like to follow up with Monsieur Pérez on the question of the environment. It seems that the first agreement Canada is going to have in the post-pandemic world is with the United Kingdom.

When we think about the importance of addressing the ongoing climate crisis even as we combat the pandemic, what kinds of things do you think need to be in a bilateral trade agreement between Canada and the U.K. for it to be an agreement that does not contribute to the problem of climate change?

[Eddy Pérez]

Thank you so much, Mr. Blaikie.

As a start, the U.K. is a like-minded partner for Canada. We saw this morning that the U.K. has committed to an emissions reduction of 68% below 1990 levels for 2030. It is a partner that you could speak to about climate action in an ambitious manner.

That means there is certainly room for greater enforceability of sustainable development chapters. As Mr. Savard-Tremblay mentioned earlier, don't see that as a protectionist approach, but rather see that as the floor of an economic relation that is respectful of the environment, health and the rights of workers.

For me that's a start. The U.K. is a country that you could speak with about those issues. You have to make it clear that the relationship you build with the U.K. is also one you could pass on to the economic relationships you could have with the EU and the United States, to build a kind of global cohesion when it comes to making sure the climate regime and the trade regime work together to achieve the climate goals.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you.

Mr. Blaikie, your time is up.

Thank you very much, Ms. Greenwood, Ms. MacEwen, and Mr. Pérez, for your valuable information.

[Proceedings continue in camera]