International Trade Committee on Oct. 2nd, 2025

[Lynn McDonald]

As you correctly pointed out, there is an awareness that there have been strategies that the United States has used to delay, for example, panel composition and to extend the time when we would be able to proceed with dispute resolution. What I can say is that, as part of the analysis, looking at where there might be areas that Canada could bring to the conversation and to the table, in terms of improvement to the agreement, the area of dispute settlement is one of them.

I would caution that we're also looking at the review and trying to keep it fairly narrow and targeted so as not to prompt a wholesale reopening or renegotiation of the text. While we are taking a look at various areas where it would be in Canada's interest to perhaps suggest that there could be improvements, I think there will be a calculation and balance as to what we bring and when we bring certain things to the table so as not to inadvertently perhaps prompt further U.S. demands that could ultimately not serve the Canadian interests. The area of dispute settlement is one where we're very aware that there are some issues, and should that be a subject of conversation or should there be a time when it might be appropriate for Canada to raise those issues, we would be ready to do so.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We will move on to Mr. McKenzie, please, for five minutes.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Thank you very much.

During the spring election campaign that recently occurred, the Liberal Party, now the Liberal government, promised that 1,000 border guards would be hired at the Canada Border Services Agency. The information I have is that 66 have been hired, so that promise hasn't been kept. Is there a negative impact on our credibility in negotiations because of that?

[Martin Moen]

I am unfortunately not sufficiently briefed on the details of how many border guards we've hired, so I can't really speak to that aspect of the issue. Certainly, what we have heard from the United States is an appreciation of the efforts we've taken to strengthen our security at the border. We haven't heard complaints along these lines. We've heard an appreciation. That has contributed, I think, to an environment that's more positive in our discussions.

Obviously, the specific issue of how many we've hired is beyond my current knowledge. We can get back to you on whether that information is accurate or whether there's something else we should add.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

I'd appreciate it if you could get back to us.

In that vein, in the conversation that is under way that addresses border security issues relative to the Americans and our country, are there other requests the U.S. is making of us?

[Martin Moen]

I'm going to have to give you a very similar answer. The scope of my knowledge and my work is very much focused on the trade issues. Obviously, there is a relationship to the border, and we're aware of that, but the technical details of what kinds of security arrangements we're discussing with the United States and so forth are beyond my scope of knowledge.

We'll have to get back to you on that.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Thank you very much.

This might be in a similar vein, but I'd like to know if your U.S. counterparts are raising any concerns about Canada forging closer ties with China.

[Martin Moen]

I will try to answer that.

In the context of negotiations on section 232 tariffs, for example, and all of that, we're trying to focus the effort on Canada's place as a security partner. That's the effort there. In terms of discussions that may be occurring about foreign policy and geopolitical issues, this is again beyond my knowledge, so we'll get back to you if there's anything we should add to that.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Thank you.

I am a bit surprised that Canada's activities outside of strictly the U.S.-Canada relationship don't factor in from the Americans' side and that you don't hear about concerns they may have with the actions we're taking in other parts of the world while discussing our trade relationship with the Americans.

Is that more or less what you're telling me, or are you simply going to check and get back to us?

[Martin Moen]

With regard to your specific question, I will check to see if there have been conversations of that sort.

On the trade side, what I can say is that we are trying to focus our efforts not on other countries, but on making the case that Canada is a secure supplier of the products covered by the section 232 tariffs, for example, and that therefore they're unjustified, rather than getting into discussions about our relationships with other countries. As to whether these have come up in conversations or not, that's something we'll have to get back to you on.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Thank you very much.

I appreciate what I'm taking to be your continued pursuit of a rules-based trade scheme. It has served us well. I think we should continue it. I'm just not sure we have any longer a willing partner on the other side of the border. That's my concern.

I wanted to ask, as a former trade commissioner myself, what specifically the trade commissioner service is doing differently from what it might have been doing a year ago to try to promote trade and trade relationships around the country. What's the revamp? What's the new effort?

[David Hutchison, Director General, Trade Strategy Bureau, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development]

The trade commissioner service, as it always has, including at the time of the service of a member of this committee, stands ready to support Canadian businesses on where they want to go.

The minister referred to the development of the trade diversification strategy. Certainly, part of this is taking advantage of our very strong trading relationships in Europe, in the Indo-Pacific and around the world.

There is a lot of opportunity for Canada. The trade commissioner service stands ready to support businesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Steeve, go ahead for five minutes, please, followed by Adam and then possibly Peter. Maybe we won't get quite that far.

The floor is yours for five minutes.

[Steeve Lavoie, Liberal, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to thank the witnesses for joining us today.

Since we're talking about negotiations, I'd like to discuss the supply chain.

In my riding, Beauport—Limoilou, in the Quebec City region, we have a gateway to the U.S.—the Port of Québec, the oldest port in America. There's a lot of talk about negotiations with the United States. There are also discussions about CUSMA with Mexico, opening up markets, and so on.

That's why I'd like you to talk to us about the supply chain today. Where is the supply chain in all of these negotiations? Whatever deals we conclude and whatever markets are open, the process has to go through a supply chain. However, that's not an easy thing to change.

I would like you to tell us about the supply chain and the role of industries, such as the Port of Québec, that make sure they are part of this entire process at the end of the negotiations.

[David Hutchison]

Madam Chair, supply chains are crucial to our economic well-being and to the ability of our industries to sustain our own economy and build trading relationships with our partners. Based on the question I heard, the member of the committee is emphasizing the crucial nature of our trade infrastructure, particularly our ports, in allowing for the two-way trade that sustains our economy and our ability to grow our businesses and take advantage of the great economic opportunities in the world. As part of the development of a trade diversification strategy, certainly such trade enablers as infrastructure are a major part of the consideration and the policy development that is being done for this government.

[Steeve Lavoie, Liberal, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you.

I yield the floor to my colleague Ms. Lapointe.

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

Thank you.

If I understand correctly, to improve the production chain and diversify supply, we should mainly look at our points of entry and exit for goods—the ports—but also the Gordie Howe International Bridge, which will soon be open to traffic.

I assume that was part of your negotiations, knowing that access to this new pathway will make travel more fluid between the two countries.

[Martin Moen]

I don't have a specific answer to that specific situation. What I can say is that in our discussions and negotiations for the CUSMA—as part of our CUSMA review, for example—we really want to make sure that we do whatever we can to allow for the continued establishment of supply chains. The nature of the trading relationship between Canada and the United States is that in most cases, the bulk of our trade is in inputs into production in the United States. For Canadian exporters, being part of a supply chain, finding themselves in the right place in the supply chain, having the infrastructure to allow them to participate in that supply chain and having a trade agreement framework that is workable and not overly burdensome, in terms of paperwork and so on, are critical for their ability to participate. That's certainly something that we do. We also do it in the context of small and medium-sized enterprises, where you have provisions within the agreement and ongoing co-operation as part of the agreement to support them.

As we look forward to the review, given the very difficult circumstances we're in, we're very aware that many Canadian companies participate in complex supply chains. We have to be very careful to work with them and understand what that means, to make sure that we continue to provide an environment that allows them to do that.

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

Thank you.

Do I have 30 seconds left, Madam Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

You have 25 seconds remaining.

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

I want to go back to supply chains. Tell me what the advantages of those chains are for Mexico, the United States and Canada.

[Martin Moen]

In terms of our supply chains and the kinds of companies that participate in them, their ability to participate in the broader North American market is really important. It's not just about cross-border trade with the United States. It's about the reality of some of the production chains that our companies are participating in. It may be that final assembly is done in the United States, but there are components coming from Mexico, components coming from Canada and components coming from elsewhere. Having Mexico as part of this equation and having Canada have the kind of relationship we have with Mexico is part of that and part of supporting that.

We're going to do whatever we can to help ensure that we have diversified chains going far beyond just North America. Whether that requires infrastructure or other aspects, we're certainly looking at that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chambers, go ahead, please.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for being with us this evening at committee. I want to thank all of you for the work you're doing to help the country through a very difficult time. I know that you have lots of team members as well who are helping support your work, so thank you.

Do you think Canada was caught a bit off guard by the imposition of these tariffs at the beginning of the year? I got the sense that...and it was not just the government. I'm not saying the government was caught off guard. Were we a bit naive about the relationship we had with the Americans?

[Martin Moen]

Well, “we” is a very expansive word. There may have been people who were caught off guard. I think there's a distinction between being caught off guard and being surprised. I'll explain what I mean by that.

I think we all recognized, because we heard what the President was saying while a candidate in the election and the sorts of things he was saying.... I think there was a realization that we had to be prepared for change. We didn't have crystal balls that could predict the exact shape of that change, but we knew change was coming. I can tell you that within the Government of Canada, within the work we were doing to prepare for the transition, we were assuming that there were risks, and we were looking at different scenarios and trying to make sure we were prepared.

What I can say, of course, is that for businesses it's impossible to prepare for these kinds of radical and dramatic shifts, and when you have investments that you've made, we realize that's a serious problem. That's why we were extremely relieved when we got the CUSMA exclusion—that was very helpful for many businesses—and deeply concerned about the section 232 duties, which we've seen before. Again, we weren't shocked to see them again, but we were surprised at the scope and nature of it, to a degree. I can assure you that we had all kinds of thinking that had gone into different possibilities in having the section 232 duties come back, because they're certainly on that list.