International Trade Committee on Jan. 27th, 2026

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Smith, if I am not mistaken, you are the chief agriculture negotiator. So you are facing some major challenges right now.

[Matthew Smith, Chief Agriculture Negotiator, Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Yes, absolutely.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

I come from Beauce, which is an agricultural region. I mention every single time that it's a magnificent region.

You are negotiating major agreements, so you know that the devil is in the details. It is essential to be very punctilious in this context. Beef and pork producers were very disappointed with the previous agreement.

Could you talk to me about non-tariff barriers and tell me why they were not identified ahead of time?

[Matthew Smith]

Could you repeat the last part of your question?

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

When you are negotiating, the details are important. It's not just about the headline. The devil is in the details when negotiating an agreement favourable to both parties. We know that beef and pork producers are unable to export their products to the United Kingdom. They have had a very bad relationship and a very bad experience.

How will you resolve this situation in the new agreements?

[Matthew Smith]

Thank you for the question.

We interact a lot with both the pork and beef industries.

I already know this because, during the first hour of the committee meeting, we discussed the fact that there were significant barriers even though the vast majority of products and goods were not subject to any tariffs at the border. In addition, our pork and beef industries often bring these barriers to the attention of the department and myself.

To be honest, we are extremely disappointed with the UK's treatment of our high-quality products. There are barriers. The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food has already mentioned that we had many discussions in order to promote, to push things forward, to gain more non-tariff access.

These discussions will continue. We now have two ways to advance these discussions through the structure already provided for in the Canada–United Kingdom Trade Continuity Agreement, which remains in force, but also with the start of the United Kingdom's session in this agreement.

The provisions of this agreement can also be used to demonstrate the extent to which it is important to have evidence-based rules.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Do you use this leverage during negotiations? I am asking this question because our industries are not satisfied, they are unhappy with the results. As you know, there are zero exports compared to tens of millions of dollars in imports. The industries are extremely disappointed.

When you renegotiate an agreement, do you use this leverage to be able to reach a better agreement?

[Matthew Smith]

Yes, and based on my experience, we raise this issue every time the Canadian and UK governments are in talks. We talk to them about our expectations for better access to their market, emphasizing that there has been no progress in recent years. I am well aware of this, and the government will continue to raise this issue during talks.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

When agriculture is the subject of negotiations, and these are important agreements, you need objectives. What are your current objectives when it comes to agriculture?

[Matthew Smith]

Negotiations led to the Canada–United Kingdom Trade Continuity Agreement after the United Kingdom left the European Union.

The result is that 99% of goods were covered by tariffs. With regard to sanitary and phytosanitary rules relevant to the discussion on agriculture, we have a few more rules and greater rigour stemming from the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, or CPTPP, in addition to the agreement we already have. We will use the structure of these two agreements to continue the discussions.

If the committee is interested, and to continue the conversation, I would also like to invite my colleague from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to talk about the plan with regard to sanitary and phytosanitary measures.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Do you do a post-mortem? Do you review the results? When you negotiate, there are surely key performance indicators and objectives that need to be met.

What happens when those objectives are not reached, as is the case now? How does it work on your end?

[Matthew Smith]

I would say that one of the challenges raised by the Canadian beef industry concerns the rules on beef in the United Kingdom. Doing business with the United Kingdom is expensive. The cost is too high compared to other markets.

For our part, we have a high-quality product that is in demand around the world, including by other parties to the CPTPP Agreement.

It's normal for the industry to want to go to the most lucrative market, and that's not the United Kingdom. I would say that the policies in place make it a less attractive market for them, less attractive for us—

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

It is too expensive because of non-tariff barriers.

[Matthew Smith]

It's not that it has not been raised. It has been raised often. The United Kingdom has been very clear about this. When it comes to the changes we asked for, to align their rules with ours, which are very clearly evidence-based, the United Kingdom is not prepared to do that with us or with other trading partners. We are not the only ones asking for greater access for our products. The United States also has very similar concerns.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Lapointe, go ahead for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I welcome you and thank you for joining us here again so soon. It was not just the minister; you too had to prepare to meet with us. I thank you for that.

Ms. Speirs, earlier you said there were several opportunities to promote support for entrepreneurs. I was in business before I entered politics. Businesswomen talk a lot about promoting themselves to seize opportunities.

You mentioned trade delegations. Do you promote yourselves to attract women and, specifically, to include women entrepreneurs in trade delegations? I met with several women entrepreneurs from the Réseau des femmes d'affaires du Québec, and they said that to successfully build relationships, it's not enough to be part of trade delegations just once. You have to build relationships and continue to be part of them so that, at some point, you can get things moving.

[Mary-Catherine Speirs]

Thank you for your question.

As I said, we use a variety of means to promote exports and opportunities for Canadians in markets and, above all, to inform businesses about the opportunities offered by our trade agreements. There are promotional programs, the trade commissioner service and programs here in Canada to provide training and information to prepare businesses to become exporters and succeed in new markets.

As you said, it is true that it takes several attempts to build relationships with customers or investors in other markets. Trade missions are one of the tools we use. We have already organized trade missions exclusively for women entrepreneurs. In addition, we will always use trade missions open to small and medium-sized businesses. We seek out and develop programs to connect businesses with other businesses in their specific sector. We develop opportunities specific to certain sectors in various markets.

Women entrepreneurs can follow two paths. On the one hand, we can put them in touch with companies or groups run by women. On the other hand, we can also help them position themselves in their sector or market of interest.

In my opinion, thanks to these two methods and several other mechanisms we have in place, it will be possible for them to develop their businesses and create opportunities in various markets.

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

Thank you. I had heard about it in the field, but I wanted you to tell me more about it.

I also met with representatives from the Business Development Bank of Canada, or BDC. At BDC, money is set aside for women entrepreneurs. It's part of a continuum. It's not just BDC that is helping women entrepreneurs; businesses in general are as well.

[Mary-Catherine Speirs]

It's the same with the trade commissioners. They have programs targeted at women entrepreneurs to encourage and train them so that they learn how to take advantage of the opportunities available.

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

You had a discussion earlier with my opposition colleague about obtaining information. You were saying that there were open emails. If an entrepreneur has specific questions, whether it's on the CP—

[Mary-Catherine Speirs]

It's the CPTPP, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.

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

When I started, it was the Trans-Pacific Partnership. They added two letters.

If an entrepreneur is looking for information, what website can they visit?

[Mary-Catherine Speirs]

I don't have the specific links with me, but we can send them to you.

There is information on our department's website. We have websites that are managed by the trade commissioner service. We still have email inboxes, through which Canadian entrepreneurs can either ask technical questions or request information on all of our trade agreements and arrangements.

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

I had other questions for you, but my time is already up.