Evidence of meeting #20 for International Trade in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cptpp.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Jason Groleau Conservative Beauce, QC
Do you think it opens a door for all other future agreements if we say it's okay to leave non-tariff barriers in place for pork and not deal with them? Don't you think we should take a closer look at this?
President and Chief Executive Director, Canadian Pork Council
Obviously, we're concerned about setting a precedent. That's why we're here today to testify before the committee. We want to make sure that the government and Parliament understand that we need to ensure that this doesn't set a precedent for other agreements.
The previous agreement was very good because market access was very unhindered and advantageous for us. However, we want to be sure that having a partner in an agreement with this type of barrier won't set a precedent that will extend to other countries in other agreements. That's really the reason we are here today. We're saying to be careful that this doesn't become a precedent whenever Canada enters into this type of agreement.
Conservative
Jason Groleau Conservative Beauce, QC
Should the Canadian government do more to defend its evidence-based agreements?
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you very much.
We'll go to Monsieur Lavoie, please, for six minutes.
Liberal
Steeve Lavoie Liberal Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses for being here today. We're very grateful to them.
My first question is for you, Mr. Nankivell. The agreement with the United Kingdom and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership are an opportunity for Canada to open up markets. There is potential. There is a lot of talk about diversification. It comes up all the time.
I often joke that I'm a visual person. For the average person, can you paint a before and after picture of this? Today, the United Kingdom isn't part of the agreement, but we want it to be. What would change in Canada's economy tomorrow morning? What would be different after we sign the agreement as opposed to what we have today? What will that look like?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada
Just to clarify, are you talking about before and after the U.K. joins, and the changes that entails?
Liberal
Steeve Lavoie Liberal Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Yes, that's right.
How will the U.K.'s accession to the agreement change Canada's economy and businesses tomorrow morning, for the average Canadian? I often like to talk about before and after. What's going to change?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada
There won't be a lot of changes overnight just by virtue of the U.K. joining. As the committee has heard, we already have ties with the United Kingdom, and those ties will continue on largely unchanged.
The importance of this step is the message it sends to the rest of the world, meaning that Canada will seek out agreements like the CPTPP. It provides opportunities to continue expanding that agreement. You're not going to notice any changes on the ground overnight. Rather, in the medium or long term, it's about opening up markets for Canadian exports.
Liberal
Steeve Lavoie Liberal Beauport—Limoilou, QC
If I understand correctly, it's more like we're signalling to the rest of the world that we want to continue diversifying our markets and opening them up. Many are saying we depend on the United States. I'm hearing things about China as well.
Where do you see the balance in all this? There's a lot of talk about being less dependent on the United States. At what point can we strike a balance? What remains to be done? We never talk about balance. People always say that we're too dependent and that we have to find new markets. That's all well and good, but where's the balance for Canada in opening up these markets? Are we ever going to say that we've diversified our markets enough? How do you see that balance?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada
It's hard to say in advance. I think things will balance out somehow and we'll see what our limits are.
Now, the important thing, the priority, is that we give ourselves the tools we need to create more options and push the boundaries in our relationship with the U.S. Of course, the U.S. is our biggest trading and security partner, so we'll need to keep our eyes trained on the White House as we go through all of these steps.
I feel like we've learned in recent days that we need to push the boundaries in our relations with the U.S., because tomorrow President Trump may conclude his own agreement with China. He obviously wants to. We mustn't ignore that. We must defend our own interests.
Liberal
Steeve Lavoie Liberal Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Thank you.
My next question is for you, Mr. Roy.
Earlier, you mentioned the scientific controls required and the fact that a certain bacterium had not been found here for over 70 years. What do these scientific controls involve? Are we meeting them, yes or no? What do they represent in terms of time and money for our producers?
Chair, Canadian Pork Council
We're being asked to test meat for Trichinella spiralis, which is a parasite.
Chair, Canadian Pork Council
They require us to test a very large number of carcasses, which makes it prohibitive to export to Great Britain. That's the problem. We test on a small scale, because this parasite has been all but eradicated in our livestock.
Liberal
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to all of our witnesses for being here today.
My first questions will be for those of you here in person. Then I'll go online to Mr. Nankivell of the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada.
First, if I understand correctly, the problem is related to sanitary and phytosanitary regulations. Are there other levels, or is that pretty much it? Please respond quickly, if you would.
February 3rd, 2026 / 11:25 a.m.
Vice-President, International Trade, Canadian Meat Council
It's supply—SPS and supply.
We like the hormone-free beef to sell to the EU or the U.K. There's Trichinella testing and then supply and the lengthy requirements to complete the dossiers that we need to submit to the EU or the U.K. for approvals.
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC
Thank you.
That said, I've been hearing about this for a long time. We also heard about it in connection with the agreement with Europe. People said it was very difficult. They said that it's all well and good to guarantee tariff access if there are indirect ways of doing what can't be done through customs duties.
Now, if we compare the European Union to the United Kingdom, are we facing the same kind of blockade?
Vice-President, International Trade, Canadian Meat Council
I think this is, more or less, an extension. The U.K. adopted the EU SPS requirements, so I think— from our perspective at least—we view the U.K. as an extension of the EU.
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC
They sold us on that agreement, of course, like they do with every agreement. We're told that these are opportunities for exporters. Have you heard any kind of commitment from the U.K. to encourage easier entry?
Chair, Canadian Pork Council
Actually, no, we haven't heard that, on the contrary. They did say that animal welfare barriers could be applied, for example. When you start dealing with that kind of barrier, which could be an animal welfare standard to be applied in one country versus the other, it's extremely relative. In reality, it becomes a very asymmetrical situation.