International Trade Committee on Feb. 3rd, 2026

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

You had previously called for the government to withdraw from the trade continuity agreement. Is that still your position?

[Tyler Fulton]

Yes. Our perspective—albeit specific to the beef cattle sector—is that the continuity agreement represents a leverage opportunity to get our issues addressed. We haven't seen any development on having those issues addressed, so, given the understanding that it was a temporary continuity agreement before the next one was signed, we think it's reasonable to consider terminating it in an effort to address our issues.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

We heard from the minister, who appeared last week on this bill as well. When we asked the minister about some of these issues, he responded—and I'll paraphrase—that discussions were ongoing on this. My understanding is that these discussions, as you mentioned, have been ongoing for several years, because the trade continuity agreement was meant to be temporary. Do you believe that the current discussions, as the minister described them, are sufficient to address your issues?

[Tyler Fulton]

Well, I have to say that, recently, we have been meeting much more frequently with the Minister of Trade than we did previously. I sense that, more broadly, we're getting much more engagement on trade-related issues. As for addressing our non-tariff barriers specifically, we've not seen any developments there.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Both agreements, the TPP and the trade continuity agreement, contain provisions for consultations and then, ultimately, dispute resolution. How much longer do you think discussions should proceed before the government considers availing itself of those mechanisms?

[Tyler Fulton]

Given that we're advocating using the continuity agreement and terminating it as leverage to address it, I guess I'm a bit skeptical as to whether those mechanisms will address our issue. We have had, as you said, lots of time since the development of these agreements.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Thank you.

You noted in your opening remarks that you are at CattleCon, if I have that right.

[Tyler Fulton]

Yes.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

I've heard reports that the U.S. is considering returning to some form of discriminatory labelling for beef products or other meat products. Are you aware of these discussions?

[Tyler Fulton]

Yes. It's been an issue that has raised its profile up and down over the course of the last 15 years. This year—actually, as of January 1—they introduced a voluntary “product of U.S.” label, which we're watching and are concerned about. Given that it's a voluntary label, we don't have the same concerns as we did when we successfully fought a country of origin labelling case at the WTO and won. That informs our position on this issue, and it's one that, on behalf of beef producers across the country, we'll continue to keep tabs on.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Has the Canadian government consulted you on this new voluntary labelling?

[Tyler Fulton]

We work closely with embassy staff. I would say that we're probably very much connected and have a good understanding as to what's developed. We don't feel as though we're lacking any information on that front.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

In the last 15 seconds I have, what would it do to the industry if country of origin labelling returned in the CUSMA review?

[Tyler Fulton]

It would decimate the relationship. It would represent discrimination against Canadian live cattle in the country, which would prevent us from having the benefits of an integrated beef market and have implications for pricing not just on the producer side but on the retail side as well.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Fonseca, you have six minutes, please.

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, from the testimony of our witnesses at this committee meeting on Bill C-13 and the U.K.'s accession to the CPTPP, we have heard what's on the table, and the stakes are very high. We've always understood that at this trade committee. This is why we've worked in a very collaborative way, with a team Canada approach, and we need to continue to do that, Madam Chair.

I hear that it's not the same at all committees on the Hill. There are many that do not work the way we do, but we understand the importance and what this means for jobs in my community and right across our great country of Canada. That's why we do this work on behalf of the stakeholders who come before us and provide witness testimony. It's so that we can take it, use it and advocate on their behalf to get the best deals and the best agreements we can.

My first question is for Mr. Buckle. Congratulations on your 75th anniversary. I want you to give us insight into what this agreement will mean for Canada in bringing the U.K. into the CPTPP. We heard one of my colleagues talking earlier about the bridge of the U.K., and Canada being an Atlantic and a Pacific nation and bridging over to many of our Pacific partners.

Could you take us through what some of the positive impacts would be for my community in Mississauga and for Canadians in general?

[Martin Buckle]

We've mentioned the fact that the trade continuity agreement, after CETA, was still in place, and I would like to see that renegotiated. There are still elements missing that need to be there.

The U.K. has already obviously been acknowledged as a member of the CPTPP, but what we're talking about is whether Canada and the U.K. get to trade on those terms.

There are two parts to it.

One is that, mentally, any time you tell a business—whether it's in the U.K. or Canada—that the tariff and non-tariff barriers are coming down, it makes them interested in a way that they were perhaps a little fearful of before. Going overseas and doing business is always a bit of a struggle, and when you just let them know that things are being improved, that is an important first step in the process.

The other part of it is that over the last couple of years, we've been working with other British chambers across Latin America to get ready for this agreement, and there is a huge amount of interest across Latin America in this opportunity.

The U.K. started to look a little more broadly at countries outside the EU, as it was forced to do after Brexit, and all these companies started to trade in South America, Central America and North America.

Once they start doing that trade, they get into a habit of doing international trade. They get comfortable. They have the expertise. They know how to deal with foreign banks, letters of credit and all the import-export paperwork you have to do. It starts to snowball as people get more comfortable with the process.

Therefore, I think the benefits for Canada are as much on the spotlight of promoting exports as they are on specifically improving the recognition of Canada. The U.K. loves Canada. Last year's Canada-England final in the Women's Rugby World Cup was the most highly watched game of women's sport in the history of sport. People love Canada. They just need the encouragement to come here and do business.

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

In what sectors do you see some of the greatest opportunity? In my community of Mississauga, we have companies like AstraZeneca; we have advanced manufacturing, defence manufacturers and security companies.

Where do you see the greatest potential for growth and opportunity, especially for jobs, when we talk about Canadian jobs?

[Martin Buckle]

Undoubtedly, both Canada and the U.K. are world leaders in the defence industry. Sadly, we're facing global threats, but with them, we know there's going to be investment, and there are great opportunities.

I think those partnerships will be more possible between U.K. and Canadian aerospace industries. The OAC is a fantastic organization in your region. Those partnerships will be much easier to develop with the improved communications we have and with the improvements that come from these trade deals.

[Peter Fonseca, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

As for the opening of this agreement to have the U.K. in the CPTPP, you've heard from other witnesses before us today about some of the challenges. They have actually gone on for decades. I recall that former prime minister Harper and the Conservatives couldn't get anything done when it came to pensioners or dealing with the beef or pork. Nothing was done at that time. We're still working on it. I know we do it collaboratively at this committee.

Do you have any thoughts on that? What could you share from the British Canadian Chamber of Trade and Commerce?

[Martin Buckle]

The trouble is always that when you open up trade agreements and you start getting into the details, you're going to be looking at the fractious elements at the edge. I'm not diminishing the concerns of any of the other speakers here today.

Most industries are doing very well and will benefit from this. When you start opening up these deals and the U.K. says that they want to open up dairy too, the idea that you could open up a one-sided agreement and not have an increase in the amount of U.K. dairy coming into Quebec is not realistic. It's just not going to happen. This was one of the problems with the last trade agreement that we were trying to negotiate a couple of years ago.

I feel for them. I remember that when I was younger, Danish pork coming into the U.K. was a matter of contention. I've heard that it's now very popular.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Mr. Buckle.

We'll go to Monsieur Savard-Tremblay for six minutes, please.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to thank all the witnesses for their remarks. My first question is for Mr. Fulton.

Earlier, in response to one of my colleague's questions, you said that the best way to tip the leverage in our favour would be to threaten to terminate the bilateral agreement. Is that what you said?

[Tyler Fulton]

I'm not sure I fully understand your question, but to clarify what I said earlier, we believe that using the continuity agreement as leverage to address our issues is appropriate.

We fully understand that there are broader sectors and broader parts of the trade relationship in scope. We wouldn't call for a termination without an FTA in place, but we would want to have the government use the leverage of the existing continuity agreement to get our issues addressed, which are simply that non-tariff barriers are preventing Canadian beef from moving.