Evidence of meeting #36 for International Trade in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was negotiations.
A recording is available from Parliament.
2:20 p.m.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Do we have other sectors where we already provide the same kind of protections that this bill would provide to the supply-managed sector?
2:20 p.m.
Director General, Market Access, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Do we have anything in legislation that prevents it, or...? I think, as I said, that governments for many years have been very clear about their defence of supply management and their protection of supply management. Is there anything in legislation like this that prevents it? Not that I am aware of.
2:20 p.m.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
No, not supply management, but are there other sectors—maybe not supply management, but something else—where we will automatically take things off the table? Is this unique, in other words?
2:20 p.m.
Director General, Market Access, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
I mean.... Listen, we do have defensive interests. As I mentioned a couple of times, when we go into a trade negotiation, we have defensive interests that are top of mind, and supply management certainly is on that list. Our cultural exemptions are another thing that is top of mind from our defensive point of view. Certain of our environmental aspects, our labour aspects and of course our defence of export of water are also top of mind when we go into trade negotiations.
Whether any of those things are in legislation is not to my knowledge. Those are policies of the government.
2:20 p.m.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Well, yes, we know, for instance, that we won't permit foreign telecoms to come in and take over part of our system. It's the same with the Broadcasting Act, etc.
Then which countries do we actually have to keep an eye on in terms of pressure on supply management for dairy, eggs and poultry?
2:20 p.m.
Director General, Market Access, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
I would say that it very much depends. The Canadian market is very lucrative, so many of our export partners want to ensure that they get access to the Canadian market. Top of mind, of course, is the United States, due to their proximity and due to our trading relationship.
We have keen interest from the European Union due to CETA. They have a large eye on our cheese market. Any of our—
2:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
I'm sorry, Mr. Hardie, but your time is up.
We will move on to Mr. Savard-Tremblay for two and half minutes.
2:25 p.m.
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I am just going to ask my question again, but it will be much simpler and more concise.
I would ask the witnesses not to compare the constitutional system of the United States with Canada's or Europe's and not to talk about the model for assigning the negotiators' mandates.
In the United States, there is a law that prohibits touching government operations. Another, called the Jones Act, prevents touching the maritime sector. They are also prohibited from touching sugar, which is systematically excluded under an agreement dating from the war of secession.
I would ask the representatives of both departments whether they believe that the Americans are weakened by those laws and that Canada could have better bargaining power because the exclusion of certain sectors has the force of law in the United States.
2:25 p.m.
Director General, Market Access, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Thank you for the question and the clarification. I appreciate that.
Madam Chair, I think when we enter into negotiations with anybody, whether it's the United States or anybody else, we always try to find ways to bring issues to the table. I do have a little bit of history on the sugar side of things and I can assure you that we are always.... Despite some of the constraints they may have in the areas of sugar, it is an area of interest to Canadian exporters and producers.
Maybe I'll turn to my colleague who has his hand up. I think he wants to add something, so please do.
2:25 p.m.
Chief Agriculture Negotiator and Director General, Trade Agreements and Negotiations, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Thank you.
In fact, I just want to clarify that indeed there are provisions in the CUSMA that provide incremental access to the U.S. sugar market for Canadian exporters under certain circumstances.
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you very much.
We will move on to Mr. Blaikie for two and a half minutes, please.
2:25 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Just following up on that, am I hearing that we have a trading partner that has a prohibition in law on granting access within an agreement, yet nevertheless granted access to Canada within a trade agreement?
2:25 p.m.
Chief Agriculture Negotiator and Director General, Trade Agreements and Negotiations, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
I'll take the question.
I'm not aware if the U.S. has a prohibition in law on its ability to discuss these matters at the negotiating table. In a previous life I worked on non-agricultural issues. I recall discussing matters related to the Jones Act with the United States in a negotiating context. It's true that the U.S. is very resistant to making commitments in those areas, but I would have to defer to somebody else. I'm not aware of a legal prohibition within the U.S. domestic legal system that prevents them from discussing these matters with their trading partners.
2:25 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Fair enough.
In the case of the Canadian cultural industry, protecting the cultural industry has obviously been an important pillar in trade policy. That's been made known to our trading partners and is represented within a number of agreements.
Has Canada's hard line on protecting its cultural industry gotten in the way of being able to conclude agreements with major trading partners?
2:25 p.m.
Director General, Market Access, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
It's certainly an area of interest, as you well note, especially when it comes to dealing with our negotiating partner to the south.
Has it prevented agreements? Clearly, it hasn't. We had the FTA with the United States first; then we had NAFTA, and now we have the CUSMA, so no, it has not prevented agreement.
Generally speaking, when we're talking about.... Trading goods tends to take more of a focus than trading in services, such as cultural issues.
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
June 11th, 2021 / 2:25 p.m.
Conservative
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
It is important to recall that the reason we are here is that the milk producers and the producers who are under supply management have little or no confidence in governments' policy decisions, particularly the ones that have been made recently by the Liberal government.
The government just kept repeating ad nauseam that it was going to protect the supply management system, and at the very end, we realized that it had made truly extraordinary concessions regarding that system.
I understand the intention of Bill C-216, proposed by my colleague Mr. Plamondon. He wants to prevent new cracks in the system from being created. However, I'm afraid that passing this bill will hurt supply management more, because, as Mr. Forsyth said, the fact that we are protecting a sector will attract other countries' attention when it comes time to negotiate.
Unfortunately, this sector will probably, once again, find itself, at the very end of the negotiations [inaudible] our negotiators are going to want to give yes and no answers.
The other reason why the producers who are under supply management have little confidence in government decisions is that in connection with the recent Canada—United States—Mexico Agreement, they were given promises of compensation but they have not yet seen an inkling of a hint of the beginning of an agreement on compensation, unfortunately.
Speaking for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, can you tell us where this stands, Mr. Fowler?
Where the problem lies at present is that the producers are being told things, but the politicians provide no assurances. We then feel that we have to propose a bill to fix things and put barriers in place that ultimately create a bigger risk of imposing constraints on the agriculture sector in Canada rather than helping it.
2:30 p.m.
Chief Agriculture Negotiator and Director General, Trade Agreements and Negotiations, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
I think the question was whether I could provide an update with respect to the provision of compensation related to the CUSMA.
The government has been fairly clear in its statement of its intention to continue to provide support to the supply management sector, including its commitment to provide producers and processors with full and fair compensation with regard to the impacts of recent trade agreements, including the CETA, the CPTPP and the CUSMA.
2:30 p.m.
Conservative
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
Mr. Fowler, stop talking about the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement. They have already been signed.
We are talking about the Canada—United States—Mexico Agreement, in connection with which unprecedented concessions were made, because we agreed to limit our exports and to allow the Americans to intrude into our product price categories, not to mention that the producers were promised compensation.
Where do things stand with this compensation scheme? That is where the entire problem lies at this point: the producers no longer trust the system and are afraid that the word of the politicians, all in favour of supply management though they be, is not enough.
2:30 p.m.
Chief Agriculture Negotiator and Director General, Trade Agreements and Negotiations, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Thank you for the question.
I'm not a member of the government. I'm Canada's chief trade negotiator. All I know is that the government has made a commitment. It seems fairly clear what that commitment is. With respect to the earlier trade agreement, I believe that commitment has been executed, and the government continues to reiterate its intention to execute that commitment vis-à-vis the CUSMA as well.
2:30 p.m.
Conservative
2:30 p.m.
Conservative
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
Thank you very much.
Mr. Forsyth, when you negotiate on behalf of multiple groups, multiple sectors, I believe that the preparations and discussions and the promises made to the various groups are important to the credibility of the negotiations.
How can a negotiator act if their hands are tied and they can't use all the tools in their possession, when their mandate is to defend certain sectors?