Home Page News Opinion Foreign Policy Politics Policy Legislation Lobbying Hill Life & People Hill Climbers Heard On The Hill Calendar Archives Classifieds
Advertising Subscribe Reuse & Permissions
Hill Times Events Hill Times Books Hill Times Careers The Wire Report The Lobby Monitor Parliament Now

On NAFTA, Canada agrees to discuss the unthinkable

By Thomas Walkom      

Sometimes governments talk tough when they are tough. But sometimes they do it to distract attention when they are preparing to cede ground, writes Thomas Walkom.

Mexico's Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo, left, Canada's Minister of Foriegn Affairs Chrystia Freeland, centre, and U.S. ambassador Robert E. Lighthizer, right, give a joint statement on Sept. 27, 2017 at the end of the third round of negotiations to rework NAFTA.
The Hill Times photograph by Andrew Meade

Canada seems to be quietly backing down on the North American Free Trade Agreement. It is now willing to bargain U.S. demands that the Liberal government had formerly dismissed as deal-breakers.

That seems to be the gist of several days of confusing messages on the NAFTA negotiations coming out of Ottawa.

Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland set the table last week when she told reporters that Ottawa has come up with “creative” ideas for dealing with the impasse in the three-way talks between Canada, Mexico and the U.S.

The talks, which are due to resume this month in Montreal, have been stalled on U.S. demands that Canada and Mexico have called so outrageous as to be not worth discussing.

One would gut portions of the agreement that allow independent panels to rule on disputed trade and economic policies. Another would require autos imported to the U.S. from Canada and Mexico to contain at least 50 per cent American content.

Yet others would bias government procurement rules in America’s favour and add a sunset clause stipulating that the treaty automatically expire after five years unless explicitly renewed.

Canada called these ideas deal-breakers and, to the irritation of the Americans, refused to provide counterproposals.

At the time, the Liberal government was excoriated by former Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper as unduly stubborn. In effect, he said that if Canada wants any kind of trade treaty with the U.S., it may have to accept one that is significantly worse than the current NAFTA.

The Liberals pooh-poohed Harper then. But now they appear more receptive to his advice.

The Globe and Mail reports that Canada will propose technical changes to auto content rules in order to mollify the Americans. The newspaper also reports that Canada is mulling over proposals to change three dispute settlement chapters in order to make them more acceptable to Washington.

One, Chapter 19, allows signatories to challenge trade practices before independent panels.

These panels can rule only whether the alleged offender is following its own trade laws. They do not have the power to change those laws.

But the Americans hate Chapter 19 anyway. Conversely, the Canadians love it, arguing that a trade deal without something like Chapter 19 would be pointless.

Another, Chapter 11, allows foreign investors to challenge and ultimately overturn host country laws that interfere with their profitability. It has been used successfully several times against Canada, but all attempts to use it against the U.S. have failed.

Yet for some inexplicable reason, the Canadians want to keep Chapter 11 while the Americans, quite sensibly, want to give governments the right to opt out of it.

Chapter 20, which gives governments the right to challenge other signatories that have failed to adhere to their NAFTA commitments, is rarely used. The Americans want it killed nonetheless.

How much Canada is willing to compromise on its so-called red line demands in order to accommodate U.S. President Donald Trump remains unclear. Perversely, one indication that the Liberal government may be preparing to cave on NAFTA is its decision to take a harder rhetorical line against the U.S. in the separate softwood lumber dispute.

Ottawa is challenging the U.S. decision to impose punitive duties on Canadian softwood lumber at the World Trade Organization. That in itself is not unusual. What is unusual is the tough-guy rhetoric accompanying it.

“When you stand strong in sending a message that says … we’ll stand up for Canadian workers, you get respect,” Trade Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne said last week about the WTO challenge. “When people see that you’re firm, you get respect.”

Sometimes governments talk tough when they are tough. But sometimes they do it to distract attention when they are preparing to cede ground.

We shall see which holds here.

Thomas Walkom is a national affairs writer for The Toronto Star. This column was released on Jan. 15. 

The Hill Times

More in News

What happens if an MP’s found guilty of sexual harassment? No one’s saying

News|By Abbas Rana
All the federal political parties say they take sexual harassment “seriously,” but none will say what disciplinary action they would take against an MP found guilty of it. “We take sexual harassment allegations very seriously,…

NDP reviewing past, present harassment processes amid Stoffer, Weir allegations

The NDP isn’t currently investigating the specific harassment allegations against former NDP MP Peter Stoffer, but it says it's looking into how such complaints were, are now and will be handled, something strategist Robin Sears…

Feds’ sweeping, new environmental assessment bill keeps power in ministers’ hands, say observers

The government’s new Impact Assessment Act includes hundreds of pages detailing changes to the environmental assessment process in Canada, but keeps ultimate power over approving natural resource projects in the hands of the federal environment…

Patrick Brown gaining support since re-emerging to challenge sexual harassment allegations, says adviser, though Conservative MPs largely quiet

Patrick Brown, who in a dramatic move re-entered the Ontario leadership late Friday afternoon, is receiving strong support from all corners of the political world since publicly re-emerging to challenge the sexual harassment allegations that…

Some Liberal MPs frustrated with leadership for not sharing anti-abortion political strategy on Canada Summer Jobs program

Some Liberal MPs say they're frustrated the party leadership did not share the political strategy with the caucus on why the government was so adamant on keeping the new controversial reproductive rights clause in the…

NDP elects former Hill staffer Vick as new party president

NDP members elected a new party president on the last day of the party’s 2018 policy convention, with former Hill staffer Mathieu Vick being elevated to the role after garnering roughly 83 per cent of…

NDP delegates protest ‘watered down’ Palestine policy

In the waning hours of the NDP policy convention’s second day dozens of delegates stood in silence with hands raised holding posters proclaiming “Free Palestine” as they protested what some called a “watered down” resolution…

Galvanizing members, regaining momentum key for NDP at convention to be in fighting shape for 2019: strategists

With more than 1,800 New Democrats gathered in Ottawa to debate and help shape future party policies, NDP strategist and former national director Karl Bélanger says a top priority this weekend is to “galvanize” members…

NDP ‘shaken’ by harassment allegations, promises to root out problems in own ranks

The NDP's approach to anti-harassment was the first policy to earn mention at its convention in Ottawa on Friday—despite not being slated on the floor—with outgoing president Marit Stiles apologizing to party members who had…


We’re offering 15% off a year-long subscription to the hill times online content.