Jock Finlayson of the Business Council of British Columbia recently wrote a column for Troy Media on the virtues of the Canada-European Union free trade deal. He listed five reasons why he thinks the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, or CETA, should be ratified as soon as possible. But there are at least as many [...]
Jock Finlayson of the Business Council of British Columbia recently wrote a column for Troy Media on the virtues of the Canada-European Union free trade deal. He listed five reasons why he thinks the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, or CETA, should be ratified as soon as possible.
But there are at least as many reasons why Prime Minister Stephen Harper should walk away from the CETA negotiations. Most relate to the ways that CETA is not about trade at all but about making dubious policy reforms that constrain our economic, social and environmental policy options in the future.
First of all, a procurement chapter in the Canada-EU deal would forbid the provinces and cities from favouring local goods and services in transit, hydro and other large infrastructure projects. Say goodbye to the 25 per cent local content rule on subway purchases in Toronto or Montreal, which creates spinoff benefits for local manufacturing. Buy local food policies in public buildings and cafeterias could also be banned.
More than 50 Canadian municipalities and municipal associations have asked to be excluded from CETA for these reasons. The backlash is not about favouring Canadian over European companies but about giving up the ability to use public spending to achieve local or sustainable development objectives. The losers will be small- and medium-sized companies that benefit from this kind of strategic procurement.
Second, we know the EU will not accept a deal with Canada that does not extend patent protections on brand-name pharmaceuticals. Even the federal government estimates the changes could increase drug costs in Canada by up to $2 billion annually by keeping cheaper generics off the market for longer. Undoubtedly this cost will be offloaded to consumers who already pay too much for prescription drugs in Canada. Continue reading »
As forecasters continue to downgrade their near-term projections for the global economy, many countries are stepping up efforts to conclude new trade agreements with key commercial partners. In just the past four months, the United States has announced that it wants to reach a free trade accord with the European Union, Japan has joined the [...]
As forecasters continue to downgrade their near-term projections for the global economy, many countries are stepping up efforts to conclude new trade agreements with key commercial partners.
In just the past four months, the United States has announced that it wants to reach a free trade accord with the European Union, Japan has joined the discussions taking place under the rubric of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and work on trade liberalization has accelerated among the members of the Association of Southeast East Asian Nations.
The backdrop for these regional negotiations is both a soft world economy and an ever diminishing prospect of finalizing a major new global trade deal through the long-stalled World Trade Organization (WTO) talks – the so-called “Doha Round.” The WTO process has essentially broken down, overwhelmed by the complexity of the contemporary multilateral trade agenda and by the inherent difficulty of achieving consensus among the 150 plus countries that comprise the WTO’s increasingly fractious membership.
Where does Canada fit within this evolving global commercial policy landscape? Canada is part of the ongoing the TPP process. In addition, Ottawa has inked a draft free trade agreement with South Korea, although it has yet to give a clear signal that it is committed to ratifying or implementing it. We are also participating in preliminary talks with India and Japan aimed at fashioning bilateral trade agreements with these important nations. But the most significant trade negotiation in which Canada is currently engaged is that with the European Union (EU) to establish a new Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). Continue reading »
With President Obama’s announcement in February 2013 that the United States will be launching trade negotiations with the European Union (“EU”) this summer, the pressure is on for Canada and the EU to complete the Canada European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (“CETA”) negotiations. Both Parties are said to be engaged in intense negotiations. [...]
With President Obama’s announcement in February 2013 that the United States will be launching trade negotiations with the European Union (“EU”) this summer, the pressure is on for Canada and the EU to complete the Canada European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (“CETA”) negotiations. Both Parties are said to be engaged in intense negotiations. Political choices may be inevitable in an agreement of this size and complexity.
This bulletin highlights five key areas of ongoing negotiations with significant implications for Canadian businesses: government procurement, financial services, investor protection, IP for pharmaceuticals, and rules of origin. We address strategic considerations.
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee The EU relies heavily on international trade for its economic development and is exposed to security and safety threats that come with this trade. Illicit international trade also undermines economic and social welfare in the EU. Effective risk [...]
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee
The EU relies heavily on international trade for its economic development and is exposed to security and safety threats that come with this trade. Illicit international trade also undermines economic and social welfare in the EU. Effective risk management of the movement of goods through the international supply chain is critical for security and safety and essential to facilitating legitimate trade and protecting the financial and economic interest of the EU and its Member States.
Since ‘9/11’ and other terrorist attacks in Europe and elsewhere, security has become a top priority for European customs. The security of the EU, of the Member States and of citizens depends on each and every single point of entry of goods into the EU. If customs failed to act to tackle risks consistently along the EU’s external borders, the customs union and the EU single market would become unsustainable.
Customs policy is an EU competence: the Member States follow a common approach. The EU has the responsibility of supervising the Union’s international trade and upholding minimum standards of customs risk management and controls. Like many other jurisdictions and in line with international standards, the EU has a common policy framework intended to address risks and accelerate legitimate trade. In addition to adopting the relevant legislation, the customs administrations throughout the EU have taken action to overhaul control procedures, techniques and resources.
The purpose of this Communication is to:
- review the implementation of customs risk management policy;
- put forward a strategic approach for the years ahead;
- make recommendations for action with a focus on efficient deployment of resources.
Click here to download the document.
Remarks by British Ambassador Sir Peter Westmacott to the Washington International Trade Association – July 25, 2012: A deep, comprehensive, state of the art free trade and investment agreement between the European Union and the United States is, in my view, both the greatest challenge and the biggest prize on the trade policy market today. [...]
Remarks by British Ambassador Sir Peter Westmacott to the Washington International Trade Association – July 25, 2012:
A deep, comprehensive, state of the art free trade and investment agreement between the European Union and the United States is, in my view, both the greatest challenge and the biggest prize on the trade policy market today.
It is a chance for us to set the standard for 21st century free trade agreements—a chance to shape the progress of globalisation as opposed to being shaped by it. And the political stars are aligned within the EU in a way they may not be again for some time. We cannot let the opportunity slip through our fingers.
It is difficult to overstate the potential of this project. The combined EU-US GDP—over thirty-two trillion dollars as of last year—accounts for nearly half the world’ output. Our trade and investment relationship is of similarly staggering size: bilateral trade between the EU and US reached $989 billion last year, and our combined bilateral investment stocks approached $3.5 trillion.
The EU-US High Level Working Group on Jobs and Growth, co-chaired by EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht and US Trade Representative Ron Kirk, has been exploring what is possible since last November. Last month its interim report noted:
“… a comprehensive transatlantic trade and investment agreement, if achievable, is the option that has the greatest potential for supporting jobs and promoting growth and competitiveness across the Atlantic.”
Despite the low level of our current tariffs, the huge size of our commercial relationship means that the potential economic benefits would be far greater than from any prior free trade agreement. Estimates suggest that a comprehensive deal covering goods, agriculture, services, investment, government procurement and regulatory co-operation would be worth two to three percent in GDP gains to the EU and the US. Irresistible at a time when growth is so stubbornly low and fragile. That’s why the UK has been at the forefront of pressing the case. . . .
An EU-US free trade agreement is not a magic bullet for Europe. Nor is it a cop-out from the Eurozone’s problems. The Eurozone is, incrementally, dealing with its sovereign debt and banking crisis, and its structural imbalances. Trade is the best tool we have in the kit bag to put growth into gear. We will put our economies back on a path that is sustainable—and at minimal cost to the taxpayer, who is already feeling the burden of the economic downturn and continued uncertainty.
Right now, there are trillions of dollars in the global economy sitting around doing nothing but lose value. If we restore businesses’ confidence in market certainty and global stability—if we open up new markets for their goods and services —we unleash the potential of the free market and business’ investment.
Source: British Embassy
European Union officials in Brussels today called for the launch of talks with Japan on a free-trade agreement, seeking to expand economic ties with Asia. The European Commission, the EU’s regulatory body, presented its proposal for negotiations with Japan on removing commercial barriers such as tariffs. The commission also aims to scale back non-tariff barriers [...]
European Union officials in Brussels today called for the launch of talks with Japan on a free-trade agreement, seeking to expand economic ties with Asia. The European Commission, the EU’s regulatory body, presented its proposal for negotiations with Japan on removing commercial barriers such as tariffs. The commission also aims to scale back non-tariff barriers in the Japanese market for financial services and for key goods such as cars and pharmaceuticals.
“Trade liberalization remains the cheapest way we have to stimulate our economy,” European Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht told reporters in Brussels. “The ball is now in the member states’ court. I would ask them to seize this opportunity and to give the commission a mandate to start negotiations soon.”
De Gucht said a free trade deal with the world’s third largest economy could increase the EU’s gross domestic product by almost one percentage point, boost EU exports to Japan by one third, and add 400,000 extra jobs across the 27-nation bloc.
The EU is sidestepping perpetually stalled World Trade Organization efforts to open markets by instead seeking trade deals with individual countries or groups of nations.
The 27-nation bloc struck a trade accord with Korea that took effect last year and is close to ratifying a pact with Colombia and Peru that will strengthen European ties with Latin America after earlier agreements with Mexico and Chile. The EU is also nearing completion of comprehensive free-trade negotiations with Canada and considering seeking a similar deal with the U.S.
The euro zone continues to struggle with a major financial crisis. Essentially, vastly different levels of competitiveness within a single currency zone cannot be sustained unless there are constant transfers of wealth from the strongest to the weakest. While leaders of the G8 called for Greece’s continuing with the euro, Germany is the key and [...]
The euro zone continues to struggle with a major financial crisis. Essentially, vastly different levels of competitiveness within a single currency zone cannot be sustained unless there are constant transfers of wealth from the strongest to the weakest. While leaders of the G8 called for Greece’s continuing with the euro, Germany is the key and Germany’s tolerance for supporting Greece seems to be nearing its political limits. Greece will hold another election on 
June 17 and if the result favours a rejection of the previously agreed austerity package, all bets are off and Greece may have to exit the euro.
The election of President Hollande in France will not bring about drastic change in handling the crisis, rather it will focus the debate within the euro zone on measures to stimulate growth and employment. Most leaders are now speaking both of fiscal consolidation and growth. Especially troubling, however, is the situation in Spain, a large economy deeply in recession, with youth unemployment at a staggering 50 percent and some banks in trouble.
So clearly Europe needs growth and enhanced international trade is one potential source of such growth. Hence, in the midst of all this turmoil, the Europeans still place a high priority on completing the Canada – EU trade negotiations this year. Europe sees Canada as a stable and prosperous place in which to do business. The strongest and most competitive European countries (notably Germany) stand to gain the most from an agreement with Canada.
A number of food producers and organizations from multiple countries this week launched the Consortium for Common Food Names, an international initiative that seeks to stop efforts to restrict the use of generic food names, including such efforts by the European Commission. The new consortium opposes any attempt to monopolize generic names that have become part [...]
A number of food producers and organizations from multiple countries this week launched the Consortium for Common Food Names, an international initiative that seeks to stop efforts to restrict the use of generic food names, including such efforts by the European Commission.
The new consortium opposes any attempt to monopolize generic names that have become part of the public domain, such as parmesan, feta, provolone, bologna, salami and many others, as well as terms used by winemakers such as “classic”, “vintage”, “fine” and “superior”. The consortium will seek to foster the adoption of an appropriate model that protects legitimate GIs like “Parmigiano Reggiano” while preserving the right of all producers to use common names like “parmesan”.
The consortium is not opposed to proper geographical indications (GIs), like “Camembert de Normandie” and “Brie de Meaux” cheeses from France, and “Clare Island Salmon” from Ireland. For some specialized products such as these, made in a specific region, it has made sense for the European Commission (EC) to protect the regional name to help preserve the unique nature of that product. In fact, products from other parts of the world – such as Washington State Apples, Idaho Potatoes, Valle de Colchagua wine from Chile, or Thai Jasmine Rice – may also benefit from similar protection. The consortium supports these types of terms as a tool to promote distinctive products.
“No one country or entity should own common food names,” said Jaime Castaneda, executive director of the new initiative, and senior vice president of trade policy at the U.S. Dairy Export Council. “If such efforts are successful, consumers will no longer recognize many of their favorite foods. Producers around the world will be forced to consider relabeling potentially billions of dollars’ worth of food products.
“Arguing that any one group should have an exclusive right to use such names is like claiming that only Italians should be permitted to use the term ‘pizza’,” he said.
Many well-known foods trace their origins to Europe, but thanks to decades of trade and the emigration of individual food artisans, these products are now made and enjoyed throughout the world. Over time, this has greatly increased the popularity of European varietals like parmesan and salami, to the commercial benefit of European and non-European producers and consumers alike.
In fact, many producers in countries throughout Europe and around the world have been making these foods for decades, if not centuries.
“Italian, Swiss and Danish immigrants brought to our land their knowledge, traditions and names of food products,” said Miguel Paulón, president of the Argentine Dairy Industry Federation. “Many of the cheese names we use have become protected GIs in Europe, despite the fact that these names were established here for more than a century as generic names, or have become part of trademarks that identify local producers. Moreover, several of those terms were also adopted many years ago by the international food standards Codex program.” Continue reading »
Over three million submission records covering more than 90,000 chemical substances are now freely accessible from the ECHA website Earlier this week, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) launched the Public Classification and Labelling (C&L) Inventory with the information coming from REACH registrations and CLP notifications so far received by the Agency. The publication of the [...]
Over three million submission records covering more than 90,000 chemical substances are now freely accessible from the ECHA website
Earlier this week, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) launched the Public Classification and Labelling (C&L) Inventory with the information coming from REACH registrations and CLP notifications so far received by the Agency.
The publication of the Inventory is a key milestone set out in the CLP Regulation and represents a significant step forward towards transparency on the physical, health or environmental hazards of chemical substances. The Inventory provides a wealth of information from Industry on how they have self-classified chemicals and shows how some companies have classified the same substance differently. ECHA has not filtered or quality checked the information provided.
“With this increased transparency, we are contributing to a more effective communication on the hazardous chemicals to workers and ultimately to consumers” said Geert Dancet, Executive Director of the European Chemicals Agency. He also encouraged Industry to use the Inventory data as a common ground for discussions between companies to reach agreement on the self-classification and labelling of hazardous substances. To provide support for the hazard communication process, ECHA is planning to develop an IT platform to facilitate contacts among notifiers of chemicals to give them the opportunity to discuss reasons for differences and, where appropriate, agree on a uniform classification.
The Public C&L Inventory represents the largest database of self-classified substances available globally. A number of options are available for searching the Inventory, based on both the substance identity and its classification. Future updates of the Inventory will continuously improve the search functions in order to enhance access to the information.
The Inventory is maintained by the Agency and the data will be refreshed on a regular basis with incoming and updated C&L information.
• The Public C&L Inventory
• C&L Inventory Q&A
• C&L Inventory Factsheet
The European Union and the United States announced today that beginning June 1, 2012, organic products certified in Europe or in the United States may be sold as organic in either region. This partnership between the two largest organic-producers in the world will establish a strong foundation from which to promote organic agriculture, benefiting the [...]
The European Union and the United States announced today that beginning June 1, 2012, organic products certified in Europe or in the United States may be sold as organic in either region. This partnership between the two largest organic-producers in the world will establish a strong foundation from which to promote organic agriculture, benefiting the growing organic industry and supporting jobs and businesses on a global scale, the EC press service announced.
The organics sector in the United States and European Union is valued at roughly €40 billion combined, and rising every year.
Formal letters creating this partnership were signed on 15 February 2012 in Nuremberg, Germany, by Dacian Cioloş, European Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development; Kathleen Merrigan, U.S. Agriculture Deputy Secretary; and Ambassador Isi Siddiqui, U.S. Trade Representative Chief Agricultural Negotiator. The signing took place at the BioFach World Organic Fair, the largest trade show for organic products in the world.
“This agreement comes with a double added value. On the one hand, organic farmers and food producers will benefit from easier access, with less bureaucracy and less costs, to both the U.S. and the EU markets, strengthening the competitiveness of this sector. In addition, it improves transparency on organic standards, and enhances consumers’ confidence and recognition of our organic food and products,” stated the EU Commissioner responsible for Agriculture and Rural Development, Dacian Cioloş. “This partnership marks an important step, taking EU-U.S. agricultural trade relations to a new level of cooperation”
A new EU-US agreement that aims to simplify and speed up customs procedures for shipments of goods crossing the Atlantic was finalized at the Transatlantic Economic Council (TEC) in Washington DC, on November 29th. The agreement, several years in the making, requires both sides to mutually recognize each other’s ‘trusted trader’ programs that cover some [...]
A new EU-US agreement that aims to simplify and speed up customs procedures for shipments of goods crossing the Atlantic was finalized at the Transatlantic Economic Council (TEC) in Washington DC, on November 29th.
The agreement, several years in the making, requires both sides to mutually recognize each other’s ‘trusted trader’ programs that cover some 4,600 EU businesses and 10,000 US firms. The mutual recognition arrangement will essentially treat the United States’ Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism and the EU’s Authorized Economic Operator program as equivalent.
The final sticking point to be resolved concerned data protection rules. The accord becomes operational once the information technology systems are in place and “no later than June 2012,” said the EU’s Taxation and Customs Union Commissioner Algirdas Semeta at the conclusion of the TEC, which the U.S. State Department hosted.
The TEC was set up in 2007 to guide and stimulate transatlantic economic convergence. The regulatory work of the TEC focuses on economically relevant issues of mutual interest, in order to identify issues where EU-U.S. cooperation could produce results in a reasonable time horizon and to engage in a strategic discussion on selected global economic issues.
Recently, a Regulation was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on textile fiber names and related labeling and marking of the fiber composition of textile products. This Regulation, applicable from May 8, 2012, repeals Directive 73/44/EEC and Directives 96/73/EC and 2008/121/EC. In the past, European legislation on this subject was specified in various Directives. [...]
Recently, a Regulation was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on textile fiber names and related labeling and marking of the fiber composition of textile products. This Regulation, applicable from May 8, 2012, repeals Directive 73/44/EEC and Directives 96/73/EC and 2008/121/EC.
In the past, European legislation on this subject was specified in various Directives. Directives need to be transposed into the national legislation of the EU Member States, which takes time and – in some cases – may lead to interpretation differences.
To avoid the need for Member States to transpose the new rules into their own national legislation and in the interest of clarity, these were adopted as a Regulation. The new EU Regulation revises rules on the use of textile fiber names, labeling, marking and determination of the fiber composition of textile products, with a view toward harmonizing the requirements within the EU and to provide accurate information to consumers.
Article 4 of the Regulation states that textile products may only be made available on the EU market when such products are labeled, marked or accompanied by commercial documents in compliance with the new Regulation. Article 15 states that the manufacturer of the textile product (i.e., “any raw, semi-worked, worked, semi-manufactured, manufactured, semi-made-up or made-up product which is exclusively composed of textile fibers”) must ensure the supply of the label or marking and the accuracy of the information contained therein when placing a textile product on the market. If the manufacturer is not established in the EU, the importer of the textile product is responsible for meeting these requirements. Under the Regulation, a distributor shall be considered a manufacturer where he places a product on the market under his name or trademark, attaches the label himself or modifies the content of the label. When making a textile product available on the market, the distributor shall ensure that textile products bear the appropriate labeling or marking.
The Regulation contains a number of annexes that, amongst others, include special provisions for the labeling and marking of certain textile products and textile products for which indication of textile fiber names or fiber composition on the labels and markings is not mandatory. The latter applies to, for example, buttons and buckles covered with textile materials, travel goods of textile materials, toys and textile parts of footwear. However, under certain conditions, this derogation does not apply. The Regulation also sets out methods for the quantitative analysis of binary and ternary textile fiber mixtures. Textile products that comply with Directive 2008/121/EC and are placed on the EU market before May 8, 2012, may continue to be made available on the market until November 9, 2014.
The new rules are of great importance to actors in the supply chain that are dealing with textile products. As market surveillance authorities will carry out random inspections on the compliance aspect, it deserves recommendation that these actors carefully analyze the new rules and determine the consequences and obligations for their operations going forward.
Source: Martin Ouwehand | Greenberg Traurig LLP
Canada should set ambitious goals in trade talks with the European Union (EU), which resume next week, since it has much to gain from a comprehensive trade accord, according to a report released yesterday by the C.D. Howe Institute. In Go Big or Go Home: Priorities for the Canada-EU Economic and Trade Agreement, Daniel Schwanen, [...]
Canada should set ambitious goals in trade talks with the European Union (EU), which resume next week, since it has much to gain from a comprehensive trade accord, according to a report released yesterday by the C.D. Howe Institute. In Go Big or Go Home: Priorities for the Canada-EU Economic and Trade Agreement, Daniel Schwanen, Associate Vice President, International and Trade Policy, says a comprehensive economic and trade agreement (CETA) between Canada and the EU is both desirable and possible.
“For Canada,” argues Schwanen, “an agreement with the EU is a strategic opportunity to significantly diversify the market for its high-value-added goods, services and skills, to increase the attractiveness of its economy for investors. It’s also a chance to make a statement that it is ready to engage with other important trade partners on reducing barriers to mutually beneficial trade and investment.”
Schwanen says a good agreement would, in addition to addressing more traditional trade barriers, open up bidding on public procurement contracts in Canada and the EU more equally to each party’s firms, address the protection of intellectual property rights, facilitate the mobility of skilled personnel, and provide assurances that regulation will be applied even-handedly between Canadian and EU firms.
Many of these issues can be contentious, as they require scrutiny of a number of Canadian government practices, including at the provincial level. Indeed, for this reason, provinces are for the first time at the negotiating table.
“Canada should seize the strategic opportunity presented by the CETA negotiations. Inability to do so would risk confining Canada’s economic horizons increasingly to home,” he concludes.
The study can be downloaded here.
(New Europe) The European Union has requested a World Trade Organization (WTO) investigation into Ontario’s renewable-energy legislation. The EU believes that the Ontario Green Energy and Economy Act (OGEA) is in breach of Canada’s WTO obligations, claiming that it is illegal to condition access to a subsidy to the use of domestic products. The OGEA [...]
(New Europe)
The European Union has requested a World Trade Organization (WTO) investigation into Ontario’s renewable-energy legislation. The EU believes that the Ontario Green Energy and Economy Act (OGEA) is in breach of Canada’s WTO obligations, claiming that it is illegal to condition access to a subsidy to the use of domestic products.
The OGEA provides for the development of programmes to encourage the use of renewable energy and it allows for its purchase at an above-market price, which constitutes a subsidy. However, access to this programme is conditioned by the use of domestic products and services. Read more here.
(EuropeanVoice.com – Toby Vogel) The European Union has brought a complaint to the World Trade Organization (WTO) over Ontario’s renewable energy policy. In announcing the step today (11 August), the European Commission said that the subsidies provided by the Canadian government to producers of renewable energy who use domestic technology violate global trade rules. The [...]
(EuropeanVoice.com – Toby Vogel)
The European Union has brought a complaint to the World Trade Organization (WTO) over Ontario’s renewable energy policy.
In announcing the step today (11 August), the European Commission said that the subsidies provided by the Canadian government to producers of renewable energy who use domestic technology violate global trade rules. The EU has now requested consultations with Canada under the WTO’s dispute settlement procedure. Bilateral negotiations on the matter failed to resolve the issue.
Exports to Canada of equipment in wind power and photovoltaic power generation are “significant” but would be higher without the ‘buy Canadian’ provisions, the Commission says. It said it was “increasingly concerned” by similar measures by other trading partners. Japan has already complained against Ontario’s policy before the WTO. Read more here.
(DFAIT) The Canadian Trade Commissioner Service is organising CE-Certification workshops designed to provide medical device companies with an overview of the EU regulatory system. Certification is mandatory on many Europe-bound products and certifies that a product has met EU consumer safety, health and environmental requirements. These workshops will provide an opportunity for Canadian manufacturers of [...]
(DFAIT)
The Canadian Trade Commissioner Service is organising CE-Certification workshops designed to provide medical device companies with an overview of the EU regulatory system.
Certification is mandatory on many Europe-bound products and certifies that a product has met EU consumer safety, health and environmental requirements.
These workshops will provide an opportunity for Canadian manufacturers of health products to learn how to seek regulatory approval for medical devices and prepare for exporting products to the EU market.
Monika de Villiers, Trade Commissioner from Germany, will attend the workshop and will answer questions regarding the European market.
Toronto – September 21
Vancouver – September 23
Calgary – September 26
Winnipeg – September 27
For more information, contact:
Anona Lukawiecki-Vydelingum
Trade Commissioner, Regional Office of the TCS in Toronto
Tel.: 416-973-5053, anona.lukawiecki-vydelingum@international.gc.ca
Wendy Trusler
Trade Commissioner, Regional Office of the TCS in Vancouver
Tel.: 604-666-0434 wendy.trusler@international.gc.ca
David Freeman
Trade Commissioner, Regional Office of the TCS in Edmonton
Tel.: 780-495-2944 david.freeman@international.gc.ca
Nicki Dewar
Trade Commissioner, Regional Office of the TCS in Winnipeg
Tel.: 204-983-7349 nicki.dewar@international.gc.ca
(World Trade Interactive) The U.S., Japan and Taiwan told the World Trade Organization last week that the European Union may not have complied with a WTO decision against EU tariffs on certain information technology products, as it claims it has. This case arose several years ago when the U.S. alleged that the EU had violated [...]
(World Trade Interactive)
The U.S., Japan and Taiwan told the World Trade Organization last week that the European Union may not have complied with a WTO decision against EU tariffs on certain information technology products, as it claims it has.
This case arose several years ago when the U.S. alleged that the EU had violated its obligations under the WTO’s Information Technology Agreement by imposing new duties on cable boxes that can access the Internet, flat-panel computer monitors and certain computer printers that can also scan, fax and/or copy. The EU countered that because these goods incorporate additional technologies they were objectively different from the items listed in the ITA and therefore not covered by that agreement, which eliminated tariffs on trade in covered high-tech goods. A WTO dispute settlement panel agreed with the U.S. and the EU declined to appeal, stating that it would instead focus on attempting to persuade other ITA members to engage in negotiations to update and expand that agreement and establish mechanisms to keep it up to date in the future.
The U.S. has signaled its willingness to consider an ITA expansion and recently solicited comments on that issue from the public. Read more here.
(AFP) The United States is dropping plans to ask global ports for full container screenings before they are being shipped over, US Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano said Wednesday. “We believe the so-called 100 percent requirement is probably not the best way to go,” Napolitano told reporters at a press briefing in Rotterdam, where she [...]
(AFP)
The United States is dropping plans to ask global ports for full container screenings before they are being shipped over, US Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano said Wednesday.
“We believe the so-called 100 percent requirement is probably not the best way to go,” Napolitano told reporters at a press briefing in Rotterdam, where she was visiting Europe’s largest port and the fourth-largest globally.
Napolitano is on a week-long tour of Britain and Europe to beef up security ties within the global supply chain between the US, Britain and Europe and has met her British counterpart Theresa May earlier this week.
On Thursday she is meeting EU ministers and will participate in a conference organised by the World Customs Organisation in Brussels, where she said she would deliver a similar message.
Asked about a 2007 US Congress requirement that all containers entering the US should be scanned by their ports of exit by 2012, Napolitano said: “We are at this point not going to insist on that.” Read more here.
(Angela Giles — Chronicle Herald) Last weekend, municipal councillors from across Canada met in Halifax for the annual Federation of Canadian Municipalities convention. On the agenda were infrastructure renewal, how to best deliver social services, and how cities should confront climate change. But if you were following the FCM’s Twitter hashtag Saturday morning, you’ll have [...]
(Angela Giles — Chronicle Herald)
Last weekend, municipal councillors from across Canada met in Halifax for the annual Federation of Canadian Municipalities convention. On the agenda were infrastructure renewal, how to best deliver social services, and how cities should confront climate change. But if you were following the FCM’s Twitter hashtag Saturday morning, you’ll have seen that trade was perhaps the most controversial topic of discussion, namely the Canada-EU free trade agreement.
This is not surprising considering how deeply the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) will affect how municipalities offer services, build infrastructure, or pay for the goods and services they need to operate. There’s little to no payoff for municipal governments from the proposed pact, just restrictions on their ability to write public policy.
In fact, Canada’s cities and towns are merely bargaining chips for the Harper government and provinces in the ongoing CETA negotiations. Read more here.
The Canadian government has stepped up lobbying in Europe for its highly-polluting tar sands industry, repeating its threats of trade conflict…
(Vancouver Sun – Pete Harrison, Reuters)
The Canadian government has stepped up lobbying in Europe for its highly-polluting tar sands industry, repeating its threats of trade conflict, a leaked letter shows.
The letter dated March 18 to Europe’s commissioners for climate, trade and energy follows Canada’s denial it threatened to scrap a free trade deal unless the European Union alters planned environmental laws.
“Given the desire for freer trade between us, it is important that our individual efforts to address climate change do not lead to the creation of unnecessary barriers,” Canadian trade official Mark Richardson said in a document sent with the letter. “The Government of Canada believes this approach raises the prospect of unjustified discrimination and is not supported by the science.”
The dispute centres around EU plans to make fuel suppliers reduce the carbon footprint of fuels by 6% over the next decade. The EU is now fine-tuning a ranking of fuels to help suppliers identify the most carbon-intensive imports. Read more here.
