A TRADE NEGOTIATOR’S primary responsibility is to achieve the best possible deal for his country.
Seems like a no-brainer, right?
Not according to Canadian critics of a trade agreement Canada signed with Colombia last year and that now requires legislation so it can be implemented.
Canadian farmers stand to see millions of dollars in new sales because of the deal, and you would think that would be the end of the story.
But the Canadian Council for International Co-operation, the Canadian Labour Congress and the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives oppose the deal because they claim it is bad for Colombian farmers. They are urging MPs not to pass the implementation legislation.
Read Also
Downturn in grain farm economics threatens to be long term
We might look back at this fall as the turning point in grain farm economics — the point where making money became really difficult.
It would be tempting to dismiss this opposition as a fringe element, but unfortunately it has also made its way into the House of Commons, where the deal is being debated.
The New Democratic Party and possibly other opposition MPs oppose the bill, and that is significant because of the House’s minority government composition. Strong opposition and delaying tactics are expected, and a trade deal that offers good news for farmers is in jeopardy.
All of this begs the question: what exactly are the responsibilities of trade negotiators?
Should they focus only on getting the best deal for their citizens, or must they also worry about getting the best deal for the citizens of the country with which they’re negotiating?
Nobody wants to be a bad global citizen, and a strong social conscience is a good thing, whether dealing with the disadvantaged in local communities or with those in other countries.
But one has to wonder why it’s necessary to bring this keenly developed social conscious to the trade bargaining table. After all, in this case, isn’t it up to the Colombian government to protect its citizens?
In an ideal world, it would be wonderful if all members of the World Trade Organization refused to sign a deal until each of them was convinced the agreement was not only good for their citizens but also for the citizens of every other WTO member, and perhaps even for every citizen of every non-WTO country.
It may be the ideal world, but it’s not the real world.
All negotiations are essentially competitions, in which the negotiators try to achieve the best deal for themselves, often at the expense of the others. It is the sometimes harsh reality of negotiating.
Some Canadians think the North American Free Trade Agreement is bad for them and they criticize the government of the day for signing it and the current government for not doing enough to fix it.
But to our knowledge, no Canadian feeling disadvantaged by NAFTA has ever criticized the U.S. and Mexican governments for signing a trade deal that was bad for some Canadians.
It would be absurd, yet that is what the opponents of the Colombian trade deal are suggesting.
Bilateral trade deals have become increasingly important in the wake of stalled world negotiations.
Unreasonable social expectations can’t be allowed to derail them.
Bruce Dyck, Terry Fries, Barb Glen, D’Arce McMillan and Ken Zacharias collaborate in the writing of Western Producer editorials.
