The Canadian ambassador to the World Trade Organization said Monday that Canada will not lose credibility at the world trade talks by defending both freer trade for exports and continued protection for import-sensitive sectors.
“We’re entering this negotiation with where we are,” John Weekes said April 19 after a speech to a government-industry trade conference. Canada’s “balanced position” will not “hobble” its negotiators.
“Everybody’s got to do some balancing in their position,” he said in an interview. “What are the Americans going to do on their sugar policy?”
Read Also
Land crash warning rejected
A technical analyst believes that Saskatchewan land values could be due for a correction, but land owners and FCC say supply/demand fundamentals drive land prices – not mathematical models
Weekes’ comments came as the government launched a two-day federal-provincial-industry dialogue on what trade position Canada should take to the launch of the next world trade talks Nov. 30-Dec. 3 in Seattle.
The federal cabinet will decide the initial negotiating position this summer and it promises to reflect the interests of both export sectors and import-sensitive sectors like supply management.
But within the first few hours of the conference, the chasm between those sectors was clear, even before the proceedings moved behind closed doors, where most of the Ottawa talks were held.
At the opening public session, University of California economist Dan Sumner said the key issue during the trade talks will be access and the reduction of both tariff and non-tariff barriers.
It will include pressure on Canada and other countries to reduce “prohibitive” tariffs that protect dairy and other import-sensitive sectors.
“Tariff reductions are central to the next round,” he said.
Exporters in the audience were nodding in agreement.
Defenders of supply management were at the microphones to suggest that farmer interests should not be traded away in the interests of trade ideology.
“We are urged to relinquish market power to get market access,” complained National Farmers Union president Fred Tait from Manitoba. He said market power does not disappear when farmers lose power but is transferred to others, including corporate traders.
Canadian Federation of Agriculture president Bob Friesen said negotiators should keep in mind that if trade deals do not benefit farmers, they are not successful.
He said Canada should not accept deals that allow other countries to subsidize farmers in ways that Canada will not do. And Canada should insist other countries live up to all their previous commitments before it accepts their promise to live up to new commitments.
“Why would we accept a cheque from someone when we found that the last one bounced?” Friesen asked.
Government speakers insisted the goal of the consultation with industry is to create a trade position that meets the needs of both sectors. They said it is possible.
But in a speech to the conference April 19, trade minister Sergio Marchi acknowledged the Canadian food sector remains sharply divided over appropriate trade policy.
“Forging a consensus here in Canada will not be easy,” he said.
“There’s no sense in pretending otherwise. There is a great diversity of competing interests and it will require our best efforts to reach a position that meets the needs and aspirations of all Canadians.”
Marchi said all sectors do have some common interests, including an end to export subsidies.
But divisions in interests and tactical advice remain.
Later, the trade minister told reporters trade agreements should not force Canada to dismantle supply management, which is an internal policy.
“I don’t see it as a bargaining chip,” he said.
