Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 181 - 210 of 270
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you very much.
Interestingly, I find a similar question, although perhaps with a different emotional tone, from both sides of this table.
As we've been discussing, what had happened was that CETA was stalled, and it was stalled around European concerns about ISDS. When we looked at the agreement, we found that we shared those concerns, and we were happy to work with the Europeans to develop the most progressive ISDS system that exists in a trade agreement.
We made changes in two particular areas. One was on the substance. We strengthened the right of the state to regulate, particularly in the interests of the environment and when it comes to labour standards. We clarified that it was the job of democratically elected states, and not of a trade agreement, to choose which parts of the economy should be in the private sector and which should be in the public sector, and that this agreement should not restrict, for example, the right of a government to choose to renationalize some area.
That's very important, and I think that speaks to concerns people have. People want to be able to elect a government and through that election to choose what will be public, what will be private, what will be environmental standards, and what will be labour standards. They don't want a trade agreement to decide that, and that is one of the things we were very pleased to change.
The other element we were pleased to change was the process and how the ISDS system worked. We have created a system in which the arbiters, the judges, have a much clearer ethical line. They cannot be lawyers in private practice one day and arbiters the next. That's really important. We've also created a system in which the choice of who sits on the panel is not dictated by the company that is choosing to bring a case, so both the process and the substance have been improved.
Something else that's worth explaining is that when it comes to the dispute settlement system, this is the one element of CETA that the Europeans determined was of national competency. That means that it is the element of the agreement that will not be provisionally applied, if and when the agreement is ratified by the European Parliament and by us.
In the way we structured the work we're doing on improving ISDS, there are some areas that are open to discussion. This is really a very important landmark development in how dispute settlement is done in international trade, and we have embarked on a very important conversation with Europeans on how to create the next-generation, more progressive dispute settlement process. I think it's something Canadians can be very proud of.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
It was these changes we made to the investment dispute settlement process that unblocked the agreement. As a result of these changes that we made—and I want to thank Steve Verheul, with whom I worked on them very closely—we were able to move the agreement forward, finalize the legal scrub on February 29, and move the agreement through the European system.
Those changes were also absolutely central in securing support of key European countries, particularly France and Germany. France and Germany had been hesitant, even critical, of the agreement prior to those changes. Right after we made those changes, I travelled to Brussels, Berlin, and Paris. There we had public announcements of support for the agreement from Germany and France. That's really what got it going.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'm going to start by addressing your assertion at the beginning.
First of all, thank you for your question and thank you for the hard work you do on the trade file. I know that you're very focused on it and that you care a lot about your constituents.
I do want to challenge one assertion, which is the idea that we are somehow rushing with CETA. This agreement, and I think Steve, of all people, can—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Steve can point to the fact that as a country, we have been working on CETA for seven years.
The legal document, which is the one that we are going to be voting on, was finalized on February 29 of this year—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
We've had a lot of time to look at it and study it and I believe very strongly, as I believe do the majority of Canadians, that it's very important, particularly in this protectionist moment in the world, to get this agreement in place to start creating the jobs and growth that it will create for Canadians. It's also a very important moment to be diversifying Canada's economic relationships.
On the pharma question, I think it's important for us to bear in mind, as I think Steve said in his testimony to the committee, that we are very mindful of this issue. This is something my colleague, the Minister of Health, is working on very attentively.
We do need to bear in mind that we have time. The new elements—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
The new elements in the pharma space that CETA is going to bring in will not actually have an impact on Canadians for eight years—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
—so it's important not to have a false sense that when this agreement enters into force, those provisions will immediately enter force.
More broadly, what CETA does highlight is that we need a broader look at Canada's pharma strategy, and that is something that my colleague, the Minister of Health, is doing.
I think it's also worth pointing out and worth Canadians knowing that drug prices in European countries like Germany, France, the U.K., are actually lower than in Canada, so the issue is—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
As I have said, this is an issue on which we are consulting broadly and that my colleague, the Minister of Health, is working on.
I think it's very important for Canadians to understand that the impact of the new provisions in CETA on drug regulation will not fully take effect for a full eight years from the time that this agreement enters into force. It's important to be truthful with Canadians about that—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
—and it is very important to appreciate that when it comes to drug prices, our government is very committed to working on that file, and it's important to understand that this is part of a broader drug pricing strategy—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
It is very important to appreciate—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
As I've said, on the impact of CETA on drug pricing, this agreement has been carefully structured so that the full impact is not felt for a full eight years.
As I think we are all aware, this is a very fast-moving space, particularly when it comes to new developments, when it comes to issues of biologics, when it comes to the trade-off between generic and brand name drugs. Our response to CETA very much needs to be, and will be, embedded in broader work that my colleague, the Minister of Health, is doing on—
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
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.
Results: 181 - 210 of 270 | Page: 7 of 9

|<
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data