:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for inviting me back to speak to you about your upcoming trip to Europe to study and promote the negotiations toward the Canada-European Union comprehensive economic and trade agreement, known as the CETA.
As you requested, I will focus today on your trip next week and then provide you with an update on the negotiations. To complement today's briefing we have also prepared materials on specific issues that may come up during your trip. Embassy staff will also brief you on additional countries' specific issues prior to your meetings.
First I'd like to offer you some context on the roles of member states in the European Parliament post-Lisbon. Neither member states nor members of Parliament participate in the negotiations themselves. We negotiate with the European Commission exclusively. However, member states and Parliament are kept abreast of the progress of negotiations, and they have a real influence on the substance of what is negotiated.
While member states have always had a role in treaty-making, there was a new role for Parliament as of December 1, 2009, when the Lisbon treaty came into force. The European Parliament now has an enhanced role in EU decision-making. One of its most important new powers is that its consent is required for all international treaties, including trade agreements, negotiated by the European Commission. As such, the commission now provides regular briefings on the progress of negotiations, resulting in a better informed Parliament that can exert influence over the commission on the substance of an agreement.
This has greatly increased the visibility and importance of the European Parliament in EU policy-making, and has resulted in the need for non-EU countries to ensure that clear and open lines of communications are established between them and European parliamentarians.
Canada must ensure that its views, policies, and positions are understood and appreciated by parliamentarians as issues pertinent to us come up for votes in Parliament.
Member states also have a role, beginning with the development of a negotiating mandate, as well as decision-making on the progress, approval, and implementation of treaties. The commission provides regular briefings to member states in the trade policy committee, the TPC--formerly called the 133 committee. This group is instrumental in developing negotiating positions, preparing offers, and reviewing the texts. The trade policy committee meets every week, and in this context I will tell you about the program and member states you will be visiting.
First of all, the United Kingdom, one of the European Union's big three member states, is generally seen as supportive of the CETA. The current coalition government sees trade as a key focus for its foreign relations. Although attention has recently been drawn toward China and India, the U.K. still has a strong affinity for trade with North America and Canada. The U.K. has expressed particular interest in professional and financial services, intellectual property, and sub-federal government procurement.
However, the U.K. is sensitive on labour mobility, one of Canada's top interests in these negotiations. We have provided a brief for you on this issue, and you might like to talk to interlocutors about this subject in particular.
The embassy is planning a round-table discussion with the Canada-U.K. chamber of commerce members and business guests, a meeting with the minister responsible for trade, and a meeting with the House of Lords EU subcommittee on economic and financial affairs and international trade.
Moving on to Strasbourg, our mission to the EU is working to develop a program of meetings with members of the European Parliament, including a meeting with the European Parliament's international trade committee as well as the European Parliament's delegation for relations with Canada. This will be an excellent opportunity to signal strong support for the CETA negotiations in Canada as well as to underline the importance Canada sees in enhancing close and open trading links with the EU. It will be important to underline Canada's continuing commitment to rejecting protectionism, reducing barriers to trade, and promoting environmentally and socially responsible trade. You should expect to hear a wide variety of views expressed by members of the European Parliament, ranging from strong support for the CETA negotiations to strong criticism and skepticism of free trade agreements in general.
In addition, it is quite probable that members of the European Parliament will want to discuss other trade files, including Canada's FTA agenda, the anti-counterfeiting trade agreement, intellectual property reforms in Canada, as well as oil sands and seals. We have prepared background briefing materials on these issues as well.
After Strasbourg the committee will split into two groups, one heading to Rome and the other to Budapest.
For the group travelling to Rome, the prospective program entails a meeting with Italian deputies and senators; a meeting on agricultural issues of importance to Italy, likely with the national association of food producers; a meeting with Italian government trade officials; and a meeting with Confindustria, Italy's main industry association.
The Italians are supportive of the CETA, and our economic relationship is important. One of Italy's strongest interests in these negotiations is geographical indications. A GI is a name that links a product's quality, reputation, or characteristic to a specific geographic location or origin--for example, Champagne or Bordeaux. We already have a wines and spirits agreement with the EU that recognizes certain GIs, and we are currently analyzing an EU proposal that seeks recognition of GIs for other agricultural products and foodstuffs. You will also find more details on this issue in your briefing package.
Last is Budapest. Hungary will be the next country to hold the rotating presidency of the EU, beginning in January 2011. This covers the period of the next two rounds of negotiations. Although the role of the rotating presidency has been reduced following the EU's Lisbon treaty, the country holding the presidency will still chair key meetings of EU ministers, including the trade policy committee.
The prospective program in Budapest includes a joint meeting with the Hungarian Parliament's EU affairs committee and the economic and informatics committee, the committees responsible for the CETA and Hungary's economic and trade policy, respectively. A meeting with the newly formed Canada-Hungary Parliamentary Friendship Group is also planned as well as meetings with an expert on Hungarian and regional economics and a senior Government of Hungary interlocutor. If time permits, a session with a representative of a Hungarian business group will be added.
Given the important role the European Union member states play in both policy-making and the eventual ratification of any international trade agreement, we anticipate that this overall program will provide the CIIT with the opportunity to underscore Canada's priorities in these negotiations to key interlocutors in the U.K., the European Parliament, Italy, and Hungary.
Now I'll give a quick update on the negotiations.
Since I was last here, we had our fifth round of negotiations, in mid-October, in Ottawa. Negotiations continue to progress well, even though we've moved to a tougher stage in the negotiations.
There are some key milestones to report. We have had a consolidated text covering all 22 areas of negotiation since last fall. Of these, we have already completed or parked four chapters and expect four more to be parked or closed at the next round in January.
We have already exchanged initial offers on goods, which would have 90% of all tariffs go duty-free immediately upon implementation of the agreement, and we've exchanged detailed requests in the areas of government procurement, services, and investment.
We expect to exchange second offers on goods and our first offers on GP--government procurement--services and investment in the next few months.
On the key areas of focus, government procurement remains one of the EU's top priorities, particularly at the sub-federal level. We are working closely with the provinces and territories towards a high level of ambition on procurement, as this will, to some extent, set the level of ambition in other areas.
In the area of goods, the remaining 10% of tariffs on which we have not yet made offers will involve some sensitivities, including some with respect to agriculture, on both sides, autos, and fish for the EU.
As I mentioned to you during a previous briefing, we are paying particular attention to and have made good progress on non-tariff barriers, especially in the area of regulatory cooperation. In fact, we are negotiating a chapter on regulatory cooperation, the first time such a chapter will be included in a free trade agreement.
On services and investment, we have been working hard to convince the EU to adopt a more ambitious approach to a negative list, which means that everything is captured by the commitments except for areas that are specifically excluded. This is the approach we have used in all of our agreements, including NAFTA, but the EU has never used this approach. Reports from the commission on their discussions with member states in this regard are encouraging.
We are also pressing the EU to go further in the area of labour mobility, including easing the temporary entry of business people and professionals and mutual recognition of qualifications.
Finally, intellectual property is also an important area, as the EU has been pressing us on copyright protection, enforcement, patents, and the protection of geographical indications. The copyright bill tabled by the government a few months ago is also likely to come up in your meetings.
Provinces and territories continue to be engaged and are well represented during negotiating rounds. We had just over 60 provincial and territorial representatives in Ottawa for the October round, and we continue to meet with them frequently, both in Ottawa and across the country.
Our consultation process in this negotiation has been the most extensive and open process we've ever had in a trade negotiation. We consult regularly with industry and civil society after each round through teleconferences and have frequent meetings with stakeholders, on request.
That's where we are now in the negotiations. We have two more formal rounds scheduled, one in January in Brussels and the other in April in Ottawa, and we continue toward the goal of completing the negotiations in 2011.
We also anticipate that ministers will meet to take stock of progress in the negotiations later this year.
CETA is a unique and important opportunity for Canada. That the committee travelled to the EU should serve to underscore Canada's commitment to an ambitious agreement.
I would be pleased to answer any questions you might have.
Thank you.
I'm going to introduce our next guest and witness. I was hoping we might have the European Economic and Social Committee arrive early so we could put them together, at Mr. Julian's suggestion, which I think was a very good one, but we're not able to do that, as they're not here. So as soon as they get here we'll have them sit in and we'll carry on. If Mr. Langrish doesn't mind staying until 5:30, we'll have you join them as well.
Before we start, and maybe to give them another minute to get here, I just want to say to the committee members that in the last round Mr. Holder brought up the question of briefing books. Just for your information, I hope we have them here for you on Wednesday.
I should also say, with regard to the visit to the European Parliament, your tickets will be e-mailed. They're electronic tickets, so they'll all be sent to your offices directly, to your parliamentary accounts. And per diems will be direct-deposited to your accounts if that's the way you get your paycheque. If there are any questions about that, please feel free to give me a call or ask the clerk, but I think it's all been taken care of. I hope to have everything completed by Thursday in that regard. You should have tickets, per diems, and briefing books by Thursday.
Let us proceed with our next witness.
Jason Langrish is the executive director of the Canada Europe Roundtable for Business. I'm going to ask Mr. Langrish to give us a brief opening statement and then we'll get into questions. In the event the representatives of the European Economic and Social Committee arrive, we'll ask them to sit in right away, because we are short of time today.
Mr. Langrish, would you please give us opening background?
Thank you.
Just as a brief overview, the Canada Europe Roundtable for Business was founded about ten years ago. The reason we were created, with the blessing of the President of the European Commission and the Prime Minister of Canada at the time, was mainly because Canadian companies weren't allowed to participate in the U.S.-EU dialogue.
The purpose was to provide recommendations to government to eliminate impediments to trade and investment. We quickly recognized that you couldn't do those types of things in a silo and that we needed something more comprehensive to reflect where the economic relationship was going. Trade and investment were increasing--and in the case of investment, increasing dramatically--and we felt that the rules that were structuring the relationship between Canada and Europe were not sufficient to meet the challenges of the time, nor would they meet the challenges and the opportunities that would be presented in the future.
In 2006 we turned our attention toward a comprehensive free trade agreement and were supported by about 110 chief executive officers. As I said, we are Canadian and European; we represent the interests of both sides. We have Canadian-headquartered companies and European-headquartered companies in our membership, so we try to take as objective a viewpoint on these negotiations as possible, recognizing that we're of course very supportive of the negotiations.
We see the negotiations being of particular importance, considering the need for a degree of trade and investment diversification away from the United States and NAFTA. I think there is a sense that we've become fairly cozy within the NAFTA relationship, and as the world globalizes and becomes multipolar, if you will, Canada needs to move beyond its traditional trade and investment relationships in the continental realm and internationalize them. And Europe presents an excellent partner in that regard. We overlap our institutions, our approach to business, to trade, to investment, and our approach to the rule of law is roughly equivalent.
It's not to say that in the context of these negotiations there won't be difficulties, but if we are unable to conclude a negotiation with the Europeans--speaking as a Canadian citizen, which I am--we're going to have a hard time convincing any subsequent partners that we're serious about negotiating with them. We feel this is an excellent opportunity to attract further investment and trade into the Canadian marketplace, but also to provide opportunities for our exporters, our service providers, and for the pools of capital that have accumulated in Canada and seek returns. Sometimes it's domestic, but sometimes it's not, and trade agreements are vital for a country such as Canada that relies for over two-thirds of its GDP wealth on export markets and international affairs.
That's where we're coming from. And as I said, we look forward to seeing this agreement concluded in 2011.
:
Thank you, Mr. Langrish. That was very helpful today. We hope to perhaps have you back in the new year when we pursue this again. It's just the joy of the committee. Thanks very much.
I'm sorry to the committee generally. We're running a little late today. We have our next witnesses prepared to go, so I'll bid Mr. Langrish farewell, and while we're doing that, we'll immediately set up the seats for our visitors from Europe.
I'm going to beg the indulgence of the committee. We may just have to go a little over time today. We have a visiting group from the European Union. They are the European Economic and Social Committee of the European community.
I think the committee will be provided with some documentation.
The European Economic and Social Committee is on a visit to Canada. We're very pleased that they were able to find some time today to join us briefly.
I hope at least that we can have an opening statement from our guests and perhaps establish some context so that members of this committee will have friends in Europe to ask questions of when we go over there.
I'm going to now introduce the members, but first I think we'll take a moment to set up translation for those who may need it.
Thank you to our committee and witnesses.
I will let Sandy Boyle, the president of the international relations section of the European Economic and Social Committee, explain who they are and what brings them to Canada at this time. We're very pleased that they are here, and I think that the members, on the eve of our visit to the European Union, will get some real benefit out of this.
I don't think there's going to be time for a lot of questions. It may be a bit unusual, but I'm going to ask you to extend your opening remarks a little bit to give us some background. I think members might benefit from that greatly.
I will introduce the members from various parts of the European Union. As I said, the president of the international relations section is Sandy Boyle. He's joined by Rose D'Sa, from the U.K.
I'm sorry, Mr. Isaias; I didn't catch what country you're from.
:
First of all, thank you very much indeed for the opportunity to be here.
As you correctly said at the beginning, we are here on a relatively short but very, very intensive program, which is representing the European Economic and Social Committee, of which the three of us are members. Jean-François is the director responsible for, among other things, external relations, but he also covers the key areas of agriculture, transport, and energy, which of course in many ways are central to some of the discussions we are having during our three-day visit here.
You asked me to be brief. I will try to be as brief as possible.
The European Economic and Social Committee is as old as the European Union itself, and I think therein lies an important message, because the founding fathers, which were only six countries, put in place a structure to ensure that civil society.... And can I say that it's the European definition of civil society? I understand that in Canada it can have some different implications, but civil society as we define it is three very distinct groups.
We have the employers group, of which José Isaias is a member and indeed a vice-president. We have the employees group, which, until I took over as president of external relations, I was a vice-president of. And we have the various interests group, which brings together quite a diverse grouping, but key players such as lead players in agriculture, consumers, and NGOs. Cultural groups and other groups come in there. But I wish to emphasize that we are talking here about predominantly mainstream European groups in terms of these three essential component parts representing now not the six countries that formed the EU, but the 27 countries that now form it.
We are a very large committee. It's done on a proportional basis between the three groups, equally divided, and the largest countries have more members than the smaller countries, but in total we number 344, so it's a very large grouping. Indeed, it's such a large grouping that we need to meet in Brussels when the European Parliament meets in Strasbourg, because we need to use their premises. Unlike here, we talk in 22 different languages, 21 of which are active in many meetings, so it's quite a diverse grouping.
The principal purpose of our visit here to Canada is that we were involved in an opinion on EU-Canada relations--that was heavily involved also--and commented on the trade agreement and the negotiations on the trade agreement. The unanimous view of our plenary, which carried the opinion, was favourable towards a trade agreement, and a substantial trade agreement, between the EU and Canada.
We also made specific recommendations on two components that we believe to be important, one being the need to address the question of sustainable development, which is now very much part of the EU agenda in trade agreements. The second, given our definition and how we value the role of civil society, is the hope that the EU-Canada agreement can replicate what has been the recent trend of finding a body that would be a joint body between the EU and Canada, made up of employers, of employee representatives, and the types of various interest groups that I have described, which could act as the body. It will not negotiate. It's not part of that process. It is part, then, of the ongoing evaluation and implementation process of the whole trade issue going forward.
I have tried to be as brief as I can. My colleagues will obviously wish to perhaps amplify if there are any questions, but in the interests of brevity, that is perhaps in a nutshell what we do.
The only other thing I would say is that in our external relations field, we now have 15 very formal structures, with bilateral arrangements with countries such as China, Brazil, and India, where we have our round tables. We're in the process of establishing a structure with Russia. Also, we are active on a regional basis in areas like Africa, the Caribbean Pacific, and Latin America, where we have specific forums that in many ways mirror the parliamentary structures in Europe. We become involved with civil society organizations, as I've defined them earlier, on this basis of mutual cooperation, exchange of views, and working on a common path together.
I will stop there in the hope that perhaps we can have a brief dialogue at what I know--for you and for us--is the end of a very long day. Thank you very much indeed.