The Senate in Ottawa is rife with several bills passed by the House of Commons that the agricultural sector is grappling with, causing some heavy concerns that could involve trade and key agriculture sectors.
The Canadian agri-food producers commend the Senate Foreign Affairs and International Trade Committee for amending Bill C-282 so that it does not apply to existing, renegotiated, or currently negotiated trade agreements.
Greg Northey, president of the Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance (CAFTA), said, “CAFTA has repeatedly called on the Senate to reject C-282, which poses a direct threat to Canada’s agri-food sector, our trade relationships, and the thousands of farmers and their families that rely on open access to global markets to make a living.”
Ninety percent of Canadian farmers depend on trade to sell their commodities, and Bill C-282 would limit Canada’s flexibility in trade negotiations, potentially leading to lost market opportunities.
Forty of Canada’s leading agriculture and agri-food groups sent a letter to the Senate urging them to reject Bill C-282 in early November – which included the Canadian Pork Council.
Michael Harvey, CAFTA’s Executive Director, highlights the significance of Senator Peter Harder’s efforts, “His proposed amendment removes risk from Canada’s relationship with key trading partners, including the U.S.”
While CAFTA still believes the Senate should reject the Bill, “the amendment significantly reduces the risk that our country simply cannot afford in the current international environment.”
An editorial submitted on behalf of the Dairy Farmers of Canada, Egg Farmers of Canada, Chicken Farmers of Canada, Turkey Farmers of Canada, and Canadian Hatching Egg Producers states Canada is an attractive trading partner for many nations.
Arguing that countries would abandon trade talks simply because Canada aims to protect its domestic dairy, poultry, and egg sectors is unsupported rhetoric. Comprehensive trade deals are just that—comprehensive. Making supply management and the livelihoods of farmers and rural communities scapegoats does our nation a great disservice.
Trade laws and policies are in place to balance the needs of all sectors, and this is precisely what Bill C-282 aims to accomplish. Canada has negotiated 15 trade deals, and only the last three agreements have required negotiators to concede market access to our domestic supply-managed sectors. This track record demonstrates that safeguarding supply management does not hinder Canada’s ability to secure beneficial trade deals, nor does it imply that Bill C-282 would hold the entire Canadian economy hostage. Instead, this important Bill provides a clear negotiating stance that can expedite other trade talks and yield positive results for a broad range of Canadian sectors.
Manitoba Senator Don Plett said people must distinguish Bill C-282 from a supply management bill rather than a trade one. This Bill will directly impact trade negotiations—not just with the U.S., where everybody is jumping all over it, saying it has become more of a problem now that Donald Trump is president-elect. But the Bill served its own problems even before.
Plett said the Conservative Party, certainly under Stephen Harper, negotiated more trade agreements than any other prime minister. He also managed to negotiate free trade agreements while protecting supply management. And Pierre Poilievre is undoubtedly capable of doing that as well.
However, Plett explained the need for flexibility in trade negotiations, referencing former PM Harper’s approach: “If you go into a free trade negotiation and put something on the table as non-negotiable, the other country will respond in kind.”
He cautioned that Bill C-282 would restrict the government’s ability to negotiate, particularly on contentious international issues, stating, “It would bind the government in not being able to deal with a certain issue. It is not an agricultural bill, in my opinion. It’s a trade bill.”
Plett said if Bill C-282 passes as amended, it won’t restrict the government in existing or renegotiated trade agreements. For instance, “it will not apply to CUSMA if we renegotiate CUSMA, nor to any existing free trade agreements.” This amendment significantly limits the Bill’s impact, ensuring it doesn’t bind Canada’s government in ongoing or future trade negotiations.
It’s hard to avoid taking sides on farmer-related and food-producing issues. Still, Canada must be careful not to hamper or curtail trade negotiations and trade deals because, aside from supply-managed commodities, Canada exports over 75 to 90 per cent of the other food commodities grown and produced in Canada.•
— By Harry Siemens