Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 201 - 270 of 270
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Ms. Lapointe, I thank you for the question, and for your work.
Since you are the only member from Quebec here, I would like to take this opportunity to tell the members of the committee how important the work done by Quebec was for CETA. Indeed, Quebec's diplomacy was essential, because there were issues to settle with Wallonia. The family links between Quebec and Wallonia and Quebec and francophone Europe were essential to obtaining Europe's support for this accord.
I want to thank you personally for your work on our project with Wallonia, and for your work with the members of the Walloon Parliament.
The Government of Quebec also worked very hard. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Premier Couillard and ministers Christine St-Pierre and Dominique Anglade, as well as our colleague Pierre Marc Johnson.
We spoke of the elements of CETA that will be very important for Quebec. Mr. Couillard and the Government of Quebec are convinced that CETA will be very important not only for all of the provinces of Canada, but especially for Quebec. As you know very well, there are now some very strong relationships between Quebec and francophone Europe. These trade relations will be easier, particularly because of tariffs.
We have not yet discussed matters related to government procurement, which is a very important element of CETA. This is also true in the cultural sphere, where there are some very solid relations between Quebec and francophone Europe. I am certain that CETA will be important.
I hope that we will have the opportunity of talking about the agricultural aspect of CETA. You probably know that Quebec is a leader in the production of hormone-free beef, which represents a great opportunity for exports from Canada to Europe.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
As I was saying earlier, there are some very good opportunities in the agricultural sector and with hormone-free beef. This is also the case in the service sector, where we can work directly. I think that CETA will provide opportunities for European investments in Canada. Certain measures will be very interesting for European investors in Canada. As we saw with our work with Thomson Reuters, it is very important for foreign investors to be able to come here with their leaders. CETA will provide that opportunity.
With regard to Canadian companies, a lot of Canadian investors work in Europe. The mobility of professionals in a company, between Canada and Europe, will be a very important element for all Canadians, but especially for Quebeckers.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I've just been speaking about how important CETA is for Quebec. Your question, Karen, is an important reminder that one of the very powerful characteristics of CETA, and the reason that it's such a deep agreement, is that the provinces were engaged from the start. It has a higher level of provincial and territorial participation than in any other trade agreement. This is probably a good opportunity to get on the record my very profound thanks to the provinces and territories, and to their trade negotiators, who, Steve has told me, spent many very long days with him in Brussels. They would get briefed by Steve late at night when he came back from negotiations. The Europeans have said to me how impressed they were by that level of federal-regional co-operation in Canada.
The Atlantic provinces have been very engaged in CETA and are deeply enthusiastic about it. That's for reasons of geography. It's also for reasons of where the interest is in the European market. Fish and seafood, as you know, are fantastic Atlantic products. They are currently subject to European tariffs of up to 25%. Upon the entry into force of CETA, 96% of those tariffs lines will be eliminated immediately, and the remaining ones will be phased out over three, five, or seven years. That's a lot. A 25% tariff is a high tariff, and for that to go to zero, I think, will be a huge boost to our exporters.
You're right to be talking about small and medium-sized and even microbusinesses. I think that's something that we as a government and, I would say, as legislators need to really be focused on: bringing the benefits of trade to small and medium-sized companies.
I think everyone here is familiar with CanExport, a program that we launched at the beginning of this year to help do that. More than 500 Canadian companies have now been granted support by CanExport to explore new markets. I urge you all to talk to people and to businesses in your riding about this opportunity. It's a real chance to be an effective constituency MP and to support people.
As part of the Atlantic growth strategy, we have been talking about trade a lot. Actually, last week I was invited to a meeting of the Atlantic growth strategy team because they wanted to hear about CETA. One of the focuses of that strategy will be ensuring that Atlantic Canadian businesses know about the opportunities that CETA presents and that they will be in a position to take advantage of them. I think that's very important work.
More generally—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
—I'll just quickly finish my sentence, Mark, because I really believe in this part—we've been talking about actually getting the trade deal done, which is a very big amount of work, but now the hardest work, in a way, is ahead of us, because the hardest work now is being sure that our companies can take advantage of it.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I can't imagine who you're talking about.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Okay. I'm very happy to talk about that.
We are very engaged with our TPP partner countries, and when I was in Lima 10 days ago I met with the U.S., Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Australia, Chile, and Peru. That's seven of the other 11 countries.
As you know, the way the TPP is structured—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
That may be the case, but I just want to be clear with everyone that the agreement itself doesn't exist without the U.S. There's no possibility of the 11 signing and it happening. A new agreement would have to be created. That's point one.
Point two is very important, and I think the Japanese ambassador to Canada has been speaking about this to journalists recently. Positions may change, but the president-elect has been very clear that he does not want to go ahead with the TPP. The next-largest country in that group is Japan. Japan, for the moment, has said that it wants to wait and see. Of course, as you know, Canada had begun negotiating a bilateral agreement with Japan when the TPP came in.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
—and the Japanese Prime Minister has said very clearly that without the U.S., the TPP is meaningless. That's the position of Japan at the moment.
We are in very close contact, and on Saturday I will again be seeing trade ministers from some of the other TPP countries. We're in very close contact. We're talking to our partners and we're waiting. We are talking to them and we're working on different scenarios.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Randy, if I could just say this, we do have bilateral agreements already in place—
Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, but I will say one thing, though—
Hon. Chrystia Freeland: —with many of those countries: Mexico, the U.S., Chile, Peru.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'm sorry; I want to answer it. I'm not allowed to? Can we do a deal that we just have two more minutes?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Randy, if one of your colleagues wants to carry on with that question, I'm happy to answer it.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
That's a great question. I think it's very important for all of us. Although we devote a lot of our time, necessarily, to talking about the finer points of trade policy, it's our job as politicians to be talking about bringing home those benefits to specific people, in particular to the constituents we represent.
Maple Leaf Foods is a great example. It's a company that I know you talk to a lot. I talk to them often, and they are very interested in the opportunities that CETA presents. They have offices all around Mississauga. Here's what Rory McAlpine of Maple Leaf Foods has to say about CETA:
The EU is obviously a very large, affluent market with a strong investment presence in Canada and vice versa. If you think about how, increasingly, global trade is built around intra-company supply chains or coordinated supply chains globally, you can see how a free trade agreement really can build up investment that’s in both respective jurisdictions.
They see some really big opportunities, and I think that should be exciting for your constituents, because it translates into jobs and growth.
I want to highlight one other aspect of CETA, speaking to you personally. I believe, just as I am Ukrainian-Canadian, that you are Portuguese-Canadian?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Your wife is Ukrainian. I think one of the elements of CETA that is exciting for a lot of Canadians is that very many Canadians trace their roots to one of the 28 member states of the European Union, and this is a real opportunity for all of those Portuguese-Canadian business associations, Italian-Canadian business associations, etc., to build those human ties into economic ties. I think that is going to be very exciting for a lot of Canadians and a lot of your constituents.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Hey, is that cash for access?
Voices: Oh, oh!
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Oh, my God. I can't do all that in 15 seconds.
The only thing I will say is I do want to assure everyone that while I am confident people on that side of this table will not agree with every single thing that I or my government do, I want to assure you all I'm a farm girl and I know how to keep my foot on the gas pedal. We are doing that. We're driving very hard on our trade agenda, including with the United States. We understand the importance of that relationship and we are working very hard to deepen it.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
First of all, it is appropriate to point out that the NDP supported the Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement, whose ISDS provisions are considerably less progressive than the ones in CETA, so there may be some questions that should be asked inside the NDP.
As I've said, I am extremely proud of the improvements to the ISDS that we've made in CETA. It creates an investment dispute settlement process that is the most progressive in the world. CETA is an agreement that has been supported by all 28 European member states, including those led by socialist governments.
When it comes to the further development of the investment dispute settlement process, as I've said, there are many elements inside the CETA agreement that are intentionally open-ended. We are building—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
What is the case, as I've said, is that the investment dispute settlement is the element of the agreement that is national competency. It is not the part that will be provisionally applied if and when the agreement is ratified by the European Parliament.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
After that happens, the agreement will be provisionally applied, and 98% will come into effect. Then it is the turn of the national parliaments to study the agreement and to vote on whether the remaining element is then applied.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Hang on, hang on. No. During that period—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Of course. I don't know if people know that Kyle Peterson is actually Kyle Petryshyn. It's true. It was very nice to be with you at the Holodomor commemoration.
Yesterday I had a great privilege. Nadiya Savchenko, the Ukrainian pilot who had been captured and held captive by Russians—who knows what horrors she experienced?—was released and is back in Ukraine. She is a very active Ukrainian political leader, and I had the opportunity to meet her, which was very moving for me. She's a real hero.
The economy is not her principal focus, but she said to me that she particularly wanted to talk about CUFTA and that she saw this agreement as a chance to deepen the strategic partnership with Canada at a time when Ukraine is quite rightly feeling particularly vulnerable. She sees the agreement also as a chance for Ukrainian companies to learn from Canadian standards.
MaryAnn Mihychuk, Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour, who also happens to be Ukrainian-Canadian, was in Ukraine last week talking about labour standards and some of the elements we've built into CUFTA to help Ukrainians raise their labour and environmental standards. Nadiya Savchenko was really grateful for that. She said they see Canada as more than a partner; they see Canada as a friend. They trust us and they see a deepening of our economic relationship as an opportunity for them to develop higher standards of their own.
There are going to be real economic benefits as well. I think the estimates we've done say CUFTA should increase trade between Canada and Ukraine by 20%. That's significant. I think there is also something very appropriate about our discussing the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement, which I do hope the NDP will support. I hope we can get unanimous support in Parliament for it.
The European Union has a trade agreement with Ukraine as well. We're now able to have a trading space that goes from Vancouver all the way to Kharkiv. That's a great accomplishment.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
That's okay. It's going to be more fun in a hour, right?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Good morning, Mark, and good morning, colleagues. It's great to be here with you this morning. As Mark has already said, I am joined here by Christine Hogan, my wonderful deputy minister with whom I very much enjoy working, and, equally wonderful, the department's chief financial officer, Arun Thangaraj.
Let me make a few opening remarks to set the stage and give people a sense of where I'm coming from and where the government is coming from when it comes to trade.
Canada is a trading nation. International trade and investment are essential to our standard of life and to improving the standard of living of people all over the world. That's a really important point for us. As everyone here knows, trade helps us open markets to Canadian goods and services, create really well-paying jobs, and give Canadian consumers more choice and lower prices.
Trade is equivalent to more than 60% of Canada's GDP. One out of five jobs in Canada is tied to Canadian exports, and—something that for me is a really crucial point—exporting companies pay 14% higher wages than companies that are not involved in international trade. That's one reason trade is such an important part of our middle-class prosperity agenda.
Free trade agreements don't only connect Canada to the rest of the world—important as that is—they also are an essential driver of economic growth. Consider NAFTA. According to a University of Toronto study, that agreement has added 3.4% to Canada's GDP. When you think about where our GDP numbers are now, that's a significant boost. Or consider CETA. According to a joint Canada-EU study, that agreement is expected to increase Canada's GDP, once implemented, by 0.77%. That's a real driver of growth. At a time of stagnant growth around the world, the importance of trade as a driver of growth really can't be overstated. It's important across all regions of the country.
In the Atlantic provinces, trade represents almost 74% of GDP. In Ontario, trade as a total share of GDP is 71%. In B.C. 40% of exports are destined for the high-growth Asian markets that maybe we'll have a chance to talk about later today.
In Quebec, exports account for 45% of the province's GDP. Canadians are a trading nation and our government vigorously supports trade. Our party was elected thanks to a program based on trade, and we will continue to seek out outlets and to promote high quality trade agreements.
When the United States adopted discriminatory labelling practices that disrupted supply chains for our beef and pork producers, it was the enforcement of WTO international trade regulations that allowed our government, working in close co-operation with Mexico, to fight against American protectionism. And we won. I am very proud of that. It was a victory for multilateralism, a victory for Canada, and a victory for beef and pork producers. I am proud to have taken part in that struggle and to have won the battle, and only eight weeks after our government took power.
The protectionist measures imposed by our trading partners are damaging to Canada's economy.
It is essential that we maintain an open, predictable and fair international trading system. Canadians understand that reality and want to take part in the conversation about it.
Important questions have been raised on many occasions about the way we negotiate trade deals. Canadians felt that the previous government did not consult them enough. That is why our government attaches so much importance to the establishment of a solid political consensus around what I call progressive international trade. This democratic and consultative approach is the only way to maintain public support for trade in this era of protectionist measures, and it is the right thing to do.
Consider CETA. Our work on this landmark agreement should leave no doubt about our commitment to free, fair, and progressive trade, and our ability to get deals done. Early in our mandate, we recognized the importance of our relationship with Europe, and as I once sat around this table as a member of the committee and as the Liberal trade critic, I think people will remember that we supported CETA when we were in opposition.
We also recognized the clear need for progressive improvements if this deal were to actually get implemented. We responded to Canadians, to EU citizens, and to our businesses. We responded to concerns about fairness and transparency. As a result, this progressive trade agreement now enjoys wide support on both sides of the Atlantic. For example, just yesterday, I met with a key figure in the CETA debate, the president of the European Union Parliament, Martin Schulz, who is a leading German social democrat. This was President Schulz' first trip to Canada, and his strong support for CETA is going to make him a crucial ally in the ratification effort by the European Parliament.
In the investment chapter of CETA, we strengthened the right to regulate. This is something I was very pleased to do. The sovereign right of democratically elected governments to regulate, in particular on issues like the environment, is something Canadians believe in, and so do Europeans.
The second area in which we made important modifications was to the dispute resolution process. We made the system more ethical, more fair, and more transparent. These are important changes, and this is an area in which Canada, working together with Europe and also on our own, is going to be championing work in the international trade arena. I'd be happy to discuss them further.
Last month I travelled to Brussels and to Berlin to promote CETA, and I was very encouraged by what I heard. I was delighted to meet with Germany's vice-chancellor, Sigmar Gabriel. He is also the leader of Germany's social democrats, and so again, a very key person in the discussions of CETA in Europe.
Mr. Gabriel had previously publicly voiced concerns about CETA but we did a public press conference, Mr. Gabriel and I together, in his office in Berlin, and at that meeting he said, and I quote, “This is simply a good agreement.” He called the new CETA a sign of good governance, consumer protection, environmental protection, and employee rights. Let me emphasize that this is support coming from the German social democrats.
We also now enjoy support from the French government and therefore from the socialist party in France, another really important decision-maker on CETA. In June of 2015, Matthias Fekl, France's Minister of State for Foreign Trade, said that if France's proposals on the dispute settlement mechanism were not taken into account, there would be no majority in France to ratify this treaty.
Now, because of the work that we've done on CETA, within the past couple of weeks, Mr. Fekl has come out strongly in support of CETA, as has François Hollande, and Mr. Fekl has said that CETA is a good agreement. Again, this is really essential European support.
Our work on CETA should leave no doubt as to our government's commitment to trade and our ability, crucially, to get deals done.
Another essential area for us is our trading relationship with the United States. As I know everyone on the committee appreciates, more than 70% of Canada's trade is with the U.S. This is an essential market, an essential relationship. Consider, for example, Ontario's manufactured goods. I know one of our members has a very particular interest there. More than 90% of Ontario's manufactured exports go to the U.S., so this is a really key relationship. As you know from my mandate letter and from our government's focus, building, strengthening, and deepening that relationship with the United States is a key focus for the government overall. It's a key focus for me as trade minister, and as chair of the Canada-U.S. cabinet committee. Two weeks ago, I was in Washington for a trilateral meeting of the NAFTA trade ministers. My Mexican and American counterparts said it was really great to have Canada back at the table. That was the first meeting of that group, which ought to meet annually, in nearly two years, and of course we are really pleased that we'll have the NAL summit—again, this was missed last year— here in Ottawa in June. It's an important event for Canada.
Let me now turn to the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, about which I spoke at length last week. I must commend the leadership all the honourable members of this committee have shown, as well as the consultations you are holding with communities all across the country.
I'd really like to underscore that point. I think this committee has been probably the most active committee, travelling around the country, talking to Canadians, and, crucially, listening to Canadians.
I was really struck by the importance of your work when the portrait of our 21st Prime Minister, Paul Martin, was unveiled last week. People who have seen that portrait will note that it is a painting of Mr. Martin standing in the House of Commons. He talked about that in his remarks. He said that he asked to be depicted in that setting because of the importance he places on Parliament as a central organ of our democracy and as a place where a big national debate should be held. He spoke specifically about the importance of parliamentary committees, and said that committees need to go out and talk to people. He spoke about, and I quote, the “inherent strength of a Parliament that sends its committees out to meet the people”.
That is what this committee is doing, and I salute those efforts. I think they are really an important part of building a progressive trade agenda and maintaining the national consensus in Canada around being an open economy.
We have also as a government been actively consulting on the TPP. To give a shout-out to my excellent parliamentary secretary, David Lametti, we have held more than 400 stakeholder consultations across the country on TPP. I personally will be doing a couple more over the coming weeks, in Toronto and Montreal. Those will be public and open-mike.
Consulting on the TPP is particularly important because of concerns Canadians have about the transparency of this agreement and because of the groups that weren't consulted previously. In particular, labour wasn't part of previous consultations, and neither was the academic community.
I'd also really like to emphasize for the record, and for members of this committee, that we have the time to have this important national debate. None of the other 11 TPP countries has yet ratified this agreement. That's a fact that I personally confirmed on Tuesday morning when I was in Arequipa, Peru, and I attended a breakfast of the 12 TPP trade ministers. We all discussed the domestic debates in our countries. No one has yet ratified the agreement. Other countries are conducting extensive debates and consultations, and in countries with parliamentary systems, extensive committee study of the agreement. I'd also like to remind members of this committee that all the TPP signatory countries have two years from February 4 to debate and discuss the deal.
Trade is essential to our prosperity, our quality of life, the growth of our country and the creation of well-paid jobs for the middle class. Holding an open, transparent and fully democratic debate to develop an inclusive approach to trade is the only way to guarantee Canada's success as a modern trading nation, and fight the protectionist trends that affect many other countries.
Thank you very much.
I would now be pleased to answer committee members' questions.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you very much, Randy.
Let me talk about a couple of different elements of that question.
First, on the point of consultations and the negotiation process itself, I think we'll agree about a lot of things. I think collectively we'll all agree about the importance of free trade in principle. When it comes to the TPP negotiations, my strong view, and this is very much based on direct conversations, and particularly with labour, but also the academic community—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
If you let me finish, Randy, you'll hear the end of my answer.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
The point was, and labour leaders are very much on the record on this, they were not included in the consultation process by the department in formulating the deal and in negotiating that deal.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Correctly, Randy?
I don't think I'm going to answer in the way that totally agrees with you.
I'm happy for Randy to take up the time with his comments, if he prefers.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
You asked a number of questions, Randy, and I'm going to go back and answer those questions in order.
On the point about consultations, my view—and this has been confirmed publicly on the record by Canada's labour leaders—is that labour was not adequately consulted during the negotiations. I think that is a big mistake. It's not the approach of our government. We think it is important to talk to labour as we are doing trade agreements. We can't go back and change time, but we can certainly include labour in the discussions of TPP, and that is essential.
Another group that was left out of the process, and we acted immediately to include this group, was Canada's academic community. They are academics in the intellectual property space. We now have one of them as our parliamentary secretary who has strong and intelligent points of view on TPP, and on intellectual property in particular. That's a community that was insufficiently included in the discussions ahead of the negotiation, and I've been pleased to include them.
In terms of the consultations and the review now, the previous discussions of this agreement happened before we had the final text and before we knew what was in the deal. As you know very well, we didn't know what was in it until it was concluded, because this was a complex negotiation. It is not just appropriate, it's essential for us as a country—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'm glad, I always love talking to Randy.
The time is up. Okay.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
B.C. is a part of our country that is very strongly focused on trade and has a natural interest in trade in Asia-Pacific. We made a point of travelling to B.C. in January to hear people's views on trade in general. We talked a lot about trade with Asia-Pacific more broadly, China and India, and we talked about the TPP.
You asked me to name some of the people we spoke to: Robin Silvester, who is well known, especially to B.C. MPs. He's the CEO of Port Metro Vancouver. He organized a round table of groups and businesses that do a lot of business in the port. I was happy to speak with him and to speak with that group.
We also did a round table with the chambers of commerce of the TPP signatory countries that are in B.C. We heard their views about the agreement. We had a very important discussion at UBC. That was a public discussion. We had academics involved, and we had a lot of students. I think we had about 200 people talking about this agreement and Asia trade generally. We also had a very good conversation on Canada's export opportunities in Asia, with a particular focus on China and India at Stewart Beck's organization, the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada. We had a lot of meetings.
As people who follow Twitter will know, I had a very good conversation yesterday with Christy Clark, the premier of B.C. Our focus of that conversation was softwood lumber, but we also talked about trade.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
As you know very well, and I hope members of the committee know, an important focus in my mandate letter is our commitment to open up trade with emerging markets, with particular focus on India and China. I won't mention the date because I'm not sure I'm allowed to, but I will be having a bilateral meeting soon with India's minister of commerce. That's a priority for us. We need to start talking about ways that we can expand that relationship. I met with her already in Nairobi, and I'm looking forward to having a longer conversation with her about ways that can grow our essential trade with that country. I know that Randy, with the Saskatchewan pulses, has a strong knowledge of and interest in that business.
As for China, the Chinese minister of commerce was not at the APEC summit, but his vice-minister was. His vice-minister had a long meeting with our ADM, and I had a very good conversation with him, too. That's another area where we are working very hard. This is something very important to bear in mind when we think about—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
On the TPP and on where we are, as you know very well, the TPP agreement was finalized during the election campaign. We came into government, and you came into Parliament at a time when the agreement was already complete.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I know, but it's complicated.
We came into government when all the partners had concluded the negotiations. Our job now is to talk to Canadians, to hear their point of view, and very much to be part of the conversation between TPP countries, as I was in APEC this week.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
As I've said, when we formed government, we inherited a finalized TPP agreement.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
We inherited a situation where the work that the previous government had done on an impact study was largely restricted to before the negotiations, to 2012, looking at the landscape before we knew the shape of the deal.
I have instructed my department to look very closely into the impacts of the TPP, and also very importantly, into what the impact would be for Canada if TPP were concluded with Canada outside the deal. That work is ongoing, and I'm looking forward to its completion.
I am very pleased that as part of this period of national debate and discussion of the agreement, other Canadian groups are having a chance in groups around the world to come forward with their studies of the TPP. That's also a really important contribution to the discussion.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
We are currently doing our work on the impact of the TPP if it were to come into force and also—this is an important fact for the committee to consider and it's something that I asked the department to be looking at when we do our work on the impact study—we need to be very thoughtful of what the consequences would be for Canada if the TPP were to come into force and Canada were to be outside that agreement. That's the economic assessment that we're working on, and it's an important one for the country.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
That's a very important part of the process. I have spoken with Perry Bellegarde about first nations consultations, and we are working with the Department of Indigenous Affairs. David and I are very closely engaged in that effort. We have some meetings over the next few days. They will definitely be included in the consultation process, and thank you for pointing that out.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you for the question. I do also want to point out since time has been taken up by various things that I do only have an hour this morning. Our Canada-U.S. cabinet subcommittee is meeting at 9:30. I am the chair of that committee, and David MacNaughton our ambassador to the U.S., has come especially from Washington to be there. So please bear that in mind.
You mentioned, Peter, the open microphone, and I really do want to, in perhaps a non-partisan spirit, congratulate the committee on having that open microphone innovation. I think that it was a response to your first week of consultations. I have had very good feedback from people about having the open microphone, so congratulations on doing it. I think you've set an important parliamentary committee precedent.
On Canada's entry into the TPP negotiations it's actually something that I raised in the House when I was like you all a trade critic. The reality is we together with Mexico entered the negotiations late, and one of the conditions of this late entry was that everything that had already been agreed we had to accept when we entered the negotiations unless we were able to get unanimous agreement of all the other TPP countries that we could reopen something. An area where Canada was successful in reopening, with Mexico, was that prior to Canada and Mexico entering the TPP had been an English language only document and Canada and Mexico succeeded in adding French and Spanish to the negotiating languages. Although very important for Canada, on really substantive trade issues a condition of entering—and it's the case with very many clubs—is if there's a group that's already there that's negotiated you have to accept what has been negotiated. We can't rewrite history, but I do think that's something we have to be aware of.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'm glad that you raised CETA. Let me actually start really at the beginning, which is that, as I mentioned earlier, when we were in opposition we supported CETA. We supported the government in its negotiations. We were very public and on the record and open about that, and I think it helped the government to have our support there when they were speaking to Europe. I did congratulate my predecessor, Ed Fast, when we finalized the legal scrub. It was very important.
The crucial thing about CETA, and a big difference, a big contrast, is the legal scrub was not finalized when we formed government, and in fact although the agreement in principle was very much celebrated a lot in Canada in September 2014, there was really no movement between September 2014 and when we formed government. We very quickly, once we got inside the CETA negotiation, spoke to our European partners. We understood that the agreement was stalled. We believe it's a really important agreement, as I said.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Yes, that is certainly possible.
Thank you for the question. I hope that my presentation in French was comprehensible.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you.
As the committee knows, the softwood lumber issue is very important and very thorny. Our government is very much aware of the importance of this issue for all of Canada, including Quebec. We are working very, very hard on this.
As you said, when we went to Washington, it was imperative that we convince the Americans of the merits of our position. The President of the United States said that we had 100 days to settle this dispute. We are at a crucial stage in the negotiations and it was impressive to hear the president speak about the importance he attaches to this issue. He stated that the softwood lumber issue was going to be resolved, in one way or another.
I have frequent talks with Michael Froman, the United States Trade Representative, about this. As I mentioned, on Tuesday I was in Arequipa, Peru, for the APEC Summit. I had a one-hour meeting with Mr. Froman and softwood lumber was our main topic of discussion. Mr. Froman will be meeting with our Ambassador to the United States tomorrow to discuss it further. I don't know if there are any journalists in the room, but I have news for them, which is that American negotiators will be coming to Ottawa next week to continue talks on this.
May I reiterate that we consider this is an extremely important issue. We understand that and we are working very, very hard on it. I also want to point out that that our objective is to maintain stable access to the American market for our industry. We will continue to be in regular contact with stakeholders in Quebec and elsewhere in the country in connection with this. May I also emphasize the fact that we want to obtain a good agreement.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Like other people around the table, I know you, but I also know Randy, and I know our chairman, Mark. The last time I spoke to him was on his farm and mending fences.
We all have a strong personal interest in advancing Canada's agricultural interests in trade.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I agree with that. I'm in close contact with our producers. The Canadian Cattlemen's Association was with me in Brussels when we went to speak about CETA.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I believe in the importance of having agricultural representatives, and diplomats who are well versed in agricultural issues, around the world advancing our interests.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I think that is an important question. When we talk about the economic impact of TPP, which we've already been discussing a little, it's important that our modelling look at two possible scenarios. The first is the economic impacts of Canada being inside the TPP, and we need to look carefully at the winners and losers inside Canada and the aggregated impact.
The second, and I strongly agree with you, is that we need to model, and it's something that I've asked the department to do that we're looking at carefully. We have to have a second clear picture—and that needs to be something as the study is completed that we share with Canadians—of what it would look like for Canada to have a world in which 11 TPP countries move forward and we do not.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you very much for the question. Thanks for the point you make about consultation.
I know the nature of our Parliamentary system is that we have robust debates, and that's important, and I welcome it. On the point of the consultations, though, I want to say something very sincere here about the consultations. I think we all do have, really across the spectrum, an understanding of the importance of trade to Canada. I think we also understand, and my Conservative colleagues have referred to this, that there are protectionist tides rising in a lot of other countries. I truly believe that for Canada to retain real public support for our being an open economy—and that is in question in so many other parts of the world—it's essential for us to bend over backwards to talk to Canadians. We cannot consult too much. We really need people to know that there is an open dialogue, that they are heard. The work of the committee in open mikes, in particular, is so important.
Are you cutting me off now?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Okay, I'll do that quickly.
I also totally agree on the small and medium-sized businesses. It's part of maintaining public support for trade. It's also really important because they are a huge part of the Canadian economy. They have a harder time plugging into trade than big companies. We have a program called CanExport. I think you all know about it, and this is something that we've worked on in carrying forward the trade agenda of the previous government. I am really proud of it. We launched it in January. Since its launch on January 5, we've approved $6 million. We have $10 million a year going into the program. We have approved $6 million already. How the program works is that it is 50-50 cost sharing, and you can ask as a small business—and please share this in your riding, I've shared it in my newsletters—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I have to stop, okay. It's a great program, though, and I do think we need to do more on that, and we're going to be unrolling an export and investment strategy that has a real focus and some more specific tools to help small businesses.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
To speak quickly to your preamble point on trade, another point I would make is that there is lots of research—both our own, but also academic research—showing that trade is a driver of productivity.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Right. Industries that are engaged in trade tend to be more productive. It makes a business more productive.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
In terms of the consultations, my own direct experience has been quite.... I've been hearing a broad variety of views, just as you all have.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Yes, I will. I think there is somewhat of a regional breakdown.
When I did consultations in Edmonton, particularly—we've talked about the agricultural sector—I heard strong support from agricultural producers.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Okay. Among areas of concern, I would say a big area, which you have heard here....
I think you had Jim Balsillie and Michael Geist speak to the committee. I've spoken to both of them. We had an early consultation.
I would say there is a kind of academic community “intellectual property” area of concerns. Those have been well articulated. I think there is an area of concern as well, and I think Michael Geist speaks to this, around the investment chapter and concerns with it.
You referred in your own remarks to the auto sector. I've heard concerns. I wanted to speak to people who work in the car industry, so I had a meeting in Oakville with Unifor workers, and I've heard both concerns voiced there, at that union worker level.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
That's okay. You asked me to list five, so I was trying to go through them for you.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I think it would be a good idea, but I think my time is up.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I have to leave now. I'm sorry. The Canada-U.S. cabinet committee is really important, and I'm really pleased the ambassador is here to speak to us.
Thanks for your questions. As a final comment, and I mean this really sincerely, not politically, I think it's very important that this is a cross-party committee; the NDP and the Conservative voices here are really important. It's really important that we have a national discussion about trade.
On some of the specific negotiating questions, I know my officials have been available. I'm happy for officials to be available.
I'd also like to make a suggestion. If it's okay with you all, I would love to have a real conversation about CETA at some point. We're getting closer, and I think it's going to be a very important, groundbreaking agreement for Canada.
I haven't spoken at length with Tracey about it, but my fantasy scenario is that we have unanimous support in Parliament for this groundbreaking deal.
I've now told her what I'm looking for.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Results: 201 - 270 of 270 | Page: 3 of 3

|<
<
1
2
3
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data