Evidence of meeting #5 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 ceta.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Thank you very much.
On the theme of the importance of trading relationships to Canada, I want to circle back to you, Mr. Brown. I think you mentioned this earlier in your testimony. Are comprehensive trade agreements required in order for Canada to have successful trading relationships with other countries?
12:45 p.m.
President, National Union of Public and General Employees, Trade Justice Network
Not on the evidence; there's a kind of strange assumption that trade equals trade deals, as if somehow, before we had trade deals, there was no international trade. Well, there was, obviously. The average tariff barrier between us and the European Union, before we got into CETA, was 2%. A 2% tariff barrier on average will not prevent trade, and it didn't.
I remember the European Commission visitors were here, insisting on the absolute necessity of CETA. I went through the list of things that we can buy now in Canada, such as Volvos and European chocolate, and I asked them what exactly was missing from this list that would be exported to Canada once we got CETA. There was a blank look. They couldn't think of one.
The idea that trade equals trade deals has never been true, and it isn't true now. Studies by Jim Stanford, for example, show that in many places, our increase in trade was bigger with countries that didn't have trade deals than it was with countries that did. So there may be some linear increase in trade with the European Union in a particular area. Was that all caused by CETA or was it caused by something else? Somebody would have to take a look at that. It isn't necessarily the case that simply CETA caused all of that increase when in many other countries' cases that wasn't the end result.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
You can imagine a scenario where Canada might seek more certainty for certain industries that are really volatile or particularly strategic, but not necessarily sign a comprehensive trade agreement that would cover all sectors of the economy.
12:50 p.m.
President, National Union of Public and General Employees, Trade Justice Network
Exactly. If you go back to the original GATT agreements, when they were being negotiated, tariffs can be a factor, of course. Countries can use tariffs to develop their own industries. We've done this in history often. Sometimes, however, tariffs can get in the way of a particular kind of trade, and those should be approached one on one. But trying to say that if there's a tariff problem in item x, we therefore need a comprehensive trade agreement that's going to limit our ability to regulate and do all of the other things just doesn't really follow. Let's take the problem and solve it.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you very much.
We'll go to Ms. Gray.
You have three minutes because we need the last five minutes for some updates on committee business.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
My first question is for Mr. Kennedy. You had mentioned that the government had answered questions that you had and was being responsive. I'm wondering whether, in some of the conversations you had with different officials of the government, they expressed when they were having trade negotiations, when they were having trade talks. We haven't seen any kind of a timeline per se. Do you have any information that you can provide us as to when some of these conversations might have been happening?
12:50 p.m.
Director, Policy, Business Council of Canada
I wouldn't know a clear timeline. When I've had questions, I've reached out to the team working on it at Global Affairs and they've answered my questions, but I've never received a clear timeline of when discussions are taking place and at what level.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Did you ever get the impression that with this transitional agreement, that it was just really easy, we were basically rolling over what was already existing? That's what we've heard today. If that's the case and if it's so easy, why don't we have an agreement?
12:50 p.m.
Director, Policy, Business Council of Canada
From what I've understood, a lot of the negotiation actually took place before we...there's reference made to this before but it was around when Theresa May was Prime Minister and releasing their initial MFN tariff schedule. I think before that and before Canada disengaged, a lot of work was done in advance, and some of that work has been picked up over the fall. I think there's a small number of areas left outstanding, as usually is the case in trade agreements, but I'm not sure what exactly those are.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Okay, that's quite a time gap there.
We also know that Australia and New Zealand are undergoing rounds of talks. Have you heard whether Canada is actually having these rounds of trade negotiations, in the conversations you've had?
12:50 p.m.
Director, Policy, Business Council of Canada
I haven't, but raising those two examples, I mean good partners for Canada...in the U.K., we're competitors. I would hope that Canada has an agreement in place before either of those two partners.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Good. Thank you.
I have a question for the Canadian Labour Congress. We've heard from other speakers today that there hasn't really been outreach into the business community. I'm wondering if you've had any outreach from the government to you from the labour aspect, looking at all of the members that you represent.
12:50 p.m.
President, Canadian Labour Congress
I'll let my colleague Chris Roberts answer. I know there's been some briefing but I haven't been directly involved.
November 16th, 2020 / 12:50 p.m.
Chris Roberts Director, Social and Economic Policy, Canadian Labour Congress
To my knowledge, there has not been outreach just yet. It doesn't mean that we can't get questions answered the same way that the Business Council and the chamber have implied, but no, we haven't been involved in consultations.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Well, that's really unfortunate, considering how many members you represent across the country.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you, Mrs. Gray. I'm sorry, we're short of time.
Mr. Sheehan, I'm sorry, you'll have to wait until our next meeting to get your questions answered.
Thank you very much to the witnesses for being here today and supplying us with some very valuable information.
I need to update and get a bit of direction from the committee as we move forward.
We will commit to continue this Canada-U.K. study this Friday and we will hear from the officials. Then next Monday, November 23, we're going to have two meetings and we'll hear from eight witnesses.
The analysts have indicated that if the committee wants to introduce and table in the House a short interim report, they can only include the witnesses up until November 20, so I am suggesting the following. If the committee approves, we adopt a short interim report summarizing the main points raised during the hearings we have heard. Then we would be able to review a draft report December 2 and table it in the House December 4. The analysts will work over the holidays to do a fuller report, Following our return at the end of January, we would then review that report and at that point we may have additional information we may want to add to that report or do something in addition to that.
Would that be all right with the committee if we take that route? We'll get in an interim report before Christmas and then we'll follow it up with a fuller report come the end of January. If the committee is okay with that, that's the process I am recommending via the conversation with the analysts.
12:55 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
12:55 p.m.
The Clerk of the Committee Ms. Christine Lafrance
Ms. Sgro, maybe we can say to the witnesses that they could leave the meeting if they want to.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Yes, I thought I had indicated that.
Thank you, again, to the witnesses. You're welcome to end your fabulous two hours with us. Thank you.
Yes, Mrs. Gray.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'd like some clarification about what would be included in the interim report, whether or not that will include recommendations and any written submissions that might have been presented by that date?
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
The analysts have indicated that all testimony up until Friday, November 20, is all they would be able to put into the interim report, plus I assume any documentation that's been sent to us could also be included.
12:55 p.m.
The Clerk
I can clarify. I think, and maybe Bashar could confirm my understanding, that the main points of the testimony up to November 23 would be summarized in an interim report of approximately three to five pages.