Advancing Canada’s

The Trade Report of the Canadian

World Trade Organisation Delegation

SiyabongaNyezi, M.P.

Cape Town Round, 2013

Prepared for: Hon. E. Fast

Department of International Trade

HOUSE OF COMMONS

CHAMBRE DES COMMUNES

CANADA

Advancing Canada’s Interests in Global Markets:

The Trade Report of the Canadian

World Trade Organisation Delegation

SiyabongaNyezi, M.P.

Delegate

Cape Town Round, 2013

Prepared for: Hon. E. Fast

Minister

Department of International Trade

Applied International Trade Bargaining (ECO3025S)

Canada 5A

Trade Report

SiyabongaNyezi

21 October 2013

Word Count (excl. Appendices): 1056

PLAGIARISM DECLARATION

1. I know that plagiarism is wrong. Plagiarism is to use another’s work and pretend

that it is one’s own.

2. I have used the footnote convention for citation and referencing. Each contribution

to, and quotation in, this assignment from the work(s) of other people has been

attributed, and has been cited and referenced.

3. This assignment is my own work.

4. I have not allowed, and will not allow, anyone to copy my work with the intention of

passing it off as his or her own work.

5. I acknowledge that copying someone else’s assignment or essay, or part of it, is

wrong, and declare that this is my own work.

Signature: Date: 21 October 2013

CONTENTS

FOREWORD…………………….…………………………………………….……...…1

INTRODUCTION...............................................................................….....3

GOALS…………………………………………………………………………………...6

i. Sub-plenum 1: Agriculture

ii. Sub-plenum 2: Services, labour and environment

iii. Sub-plenum 3: Non-agricultural Market Access (NAMA)

iv. Sub-plenum 4: WTO rules: dispute settlement and

implementation issues

v. Sub-plenum 5: TRIPS, TRIMS, e-commerce, technical barriers to trade

vi. Sub-plenum 6: Inside Treaty Preparation

STRATEGY AND ACHIEVEMENTS……..………………………….……….……..26

i. Trading Partners and Strategic Alliances

ii. Sup-plenum strategies

TRADE AGREEMENTS…………………………………………………………..…..52

FOREIGN AID BUDGET BREAKDOWN……………………………………..……55

CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………..………......57

BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………..…….......59

APPENDICES IN A SEPARATE BOOKLET

FOREWORD

Dear Sir

It is with great pleasure that I present you the report from the Cape Town

round of World Trade Organisation negotiations held in Cape Town between

July and October 2013. This report, titledAdvancing Canada’s Interests in

Global Markets, serves to inform the Ministry of the success of the Canadian

delegation at the negotiations. Secondly, it is a follow-up on the previously

submitted strategy report, titled Advancing in Global Markets,1 which set

out to highlight the trade goals sought at the negotiations; and more

importantly the strategies that would be utilised in trying to achieve those

goals.

Prior to the negotiations, the delegation identified key areas of interest, and

in an attempt to affirm Canada’s role in not only being a strong force in

global markets, but also creating new trade relations; be it through new

relations, strides towards improved trade law, or developmental aid

initiatives.

This report provides details about motions that have been passed, treaties

and trade agreements that have been signed, and the use of the

1Nyezi, S., 2013. Advancing in Global Markets: The Strategy Report of the Canadian World

Trade Organisation Delegation, Cape Town: University of Cape Town.

developmental aid budget; all in an attempt to further Canadian interests

and trade

I trust that this provide you with all the necessary information to see that

great strides have been taken towards improving not only out trade

relations, but also ensuring that national goals are aligned with global goals,

to promote the development of local markets and thriving in global markets

Thank you for honour and the opportunity to play a role in the furthering of

the nation’s interest.

__________________________________

SiyabongaNyezi, MP

Canadian World Trade Organisation Delegate

Sub-Committee: TRIPS and E-Commerce

Cape Town, South Africa

September, 2013

INTRODUCTION

Going into the Cape Town round of negotiations, the delegation had had the

obvious task of aligning its goals with areas that are most crucial to the

Canadian economy, sectors in which Canada has a competetive advantage

in; and most importantly pursue these goals in a way that is consistent with

the core principles of Canada’s trade policies.

The strength of Canada’s economy lies in the wealth of oil, a highly qualified

and skilled labour force, advanced financial and services sector, major

agriculture and agri-product exports and a strong manufacturing sector.2 It

is the prioritization of these sectors of the economy that has guided the

delegation’s approach to the negotiations. A Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

of $1.84 trillion places Canada among the global economic powers;3 and

such a strong and continuously growing economy gives Canada strong

influence on the direction of global trade.

Being a global organisation, the World Trade Organisation serves the main

purposes of fostering global trade and fairness in that trade; and providing

countries with a mechanism to gauge the strengths of other economies in

2 Central Intelligence Agency. 2012. Canada. [Online]

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ca.html [October

2013].

3The World Bank, 2013. Data: GDP (current US$), Washington DC: The World Bank Group.

[Online] http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD [October 2013].

certain sectors of interests. It is this secondary function of the WTO that the

delegation set out to use, in a way to further national Canadian interests

and turn them into market power and success in the global markets.

The trade policies of Canada are based on two fundamental principles;

which are prosperity through opportunities that are beyond the nation’s

borders; and also the expansion of domestic trade to ensure that national

markets thrive. This is all in an attempt to ensure the existence of efficient

markets, which is of great benefit to all Canadians. These policies, in

conjunction with sector-specific trade goals, are what have determined what

stance to take at the Cape Town round of negotiations.

In addition to furthering trade interests, the WTO has the developmental

goal of ensuring that countries where markets are scarcely developed receive

assistance from developed nations. The developmental function is something

Canada also prioritizes, with a developmental aid budget of $5.7 billion. This

budget, as detailed in this report, has been used throughout negotiations to

assist least developed countries develop their markets, and also to

strengthen the nation’s relations with potential trade partners.

The protection of domestic markets, together with the need to increase

Canada’s market power in global markets, and to also aid I development of

markets are the core drivers of the goals and strategy used to achieve

success of the delegation at the negotiations.

This report begins by outlining the goals sought at the Cape Town round of

negotiations; most of which were previously mentioned in the Advancing in

Global Markets strategy report. 4

Having done that, the report provides a brief account of the alliances that

were necessary for the achievement of the goals of our delegation going to

these negotiations.

The strategy used by the delegation; which includes motions, treaties, trade

agreements and developmental aid grants, is the crux of this report and

follows thereon.

4 See Appendix 1

GOALS

We approached the round of negotiations with specific goals in mind for

each of the six sup-plena. It is important to note that each of these specific

goals drew from the general goals we sought, for the furthering of Canada’s

interests in the global economy.

The main goals were to increase market access and reach for our products

and services through liberalizing international trade and also via removal of

technical barriers to trade. An equally important goal was the protection of

domestic markets in the light of the cross-border trade that we are involved

in. As much as penetrating new markets and furthering Canada’s stake in

existing markets, ensuring that domestic markets are protected and thriving

is essential, as without its boom, our global prowess would diminish.

As members of the global forum that is the WTO, we have an inherent duty

to fulfil developmental duties, hence the $5.7 billion allocated by the

Finance Ministry for this purpose. Our goal was to use this for two

purposes; to create new relations with developing countries that have the

potential to be economically fruitful in the future, and to further the genuine

interests of Canada as a nation that prides itself in aiding the development

of developing and least developed countries.

Outlined here forth are all the goals that we aimed to achieve going into the

negotiations. Drawing from the general goals detailed afore, each delegate

was mandated with achieving specific goals in their sup-plenum; a task

completed with relative success.

Do note that the actual strategyapplied in an attempt to achieve all these

goals is given in the general trade section, which follows this holistic

presentation of the goals.

Sub-plenum 1: Agriculture

Even though agriculture only contributes 2% of the country’s Agriculture,

we are a major exporter and role player in the global agriculture market. As

the largest exporter of agriculture and agri-food products since 2012,5 goals

to increase this market share are crucial.

As the delegates in this sub-plenum, Mr Hwan Hee and Ms SimisoDlodlo

were tasked with achieving three main goals with regard to agriculture, the

first being to increase market access through reductions in trade distorting

domestic support. Some nations have export subsidies and State Trading

Enterprises policies which create excess surpluses that drive product prices

down. This has negative effects on both the developed and developing world.

Exporters from developing countries are usually hit the hardest, as their

cost of farming now becomes too high to compete with farmers from

countries with excessive domestic support. For Canada, the concern is the

limiting effect of these policies in countries where we would want to increase

our market access. Reducing these distortionary support policies thus

became one of the major goals and priorities.

Secondly, the protection of Canada’s local farmers was an equally important

goal. While freeing up markets, it is important that domestic farmers are not

harmed.

5Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2012. Government of Canada. [Online]

http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/about-us/publications/economic-publications/alphabetical-

listing/an-overview-of-the-canadian-agriculture-and-agri-food-system-

2013/?id=1331319696826 [September 2013]

Our goal was to ensure that protection measure for dairy and grain products

especially, is maintained. The aim was to achieve this goal, while taking into

consideration the global concern for trade distorting protection.

Agriculture has always been a contentious issue in the WTO, due to the fact

that its products are basic necessities and all countries have at the very

least a sustenance agriculture sector. Perhaps the most challenging goal to

achieve was the creation of a master agreement on agriculture; a goal that

was eventually fulfilled. The report delves into this in further detail in the

strategy section.

Also in line with increasing market access, gaining access into the markets

of some BRICS countries; namely Brazil and the Eastern neighbours India

and China. With a combined population of almost 4 billion people, and ever-

growing economies,6 Canada stands to benefit from exporting agricultural

markets to these markets. The goal was to reach some plurilateral

agreement that would allow us access into those markets.

As a mass producer of GMO goods, it was our goal to ensure the export of

these to the rest of the world, especially Europe.

6UNData, 2013. Country profile: India, New yor: United Nations Statistics Division. [Online]

http://data.un.org/ [October 2013]

Sub-plenum 2: Services, labour and environment

The goals pursued in this sub-plenum were of utmost importance,

considering the fact thatthe services sector accounts for about 70% of

Canada’s Gross Domestic Product.7 This placed particular importance in

identifying goals that would not only protect, but also further the stake

Canada has in global markets, using what is proportionally the most crucial

component of our economy.

The first goal was to liberalize global services through transparent and

predictable trade. This links with the second goal of maintaining and

improving the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), which aims

to achieve that very goal. Special focus was on extending the reach of our

financial services, a ‘commodity’ in high demand globally and one Canada

has competitive advantage in.

Canada is considered, by scholars and politicians, a leader in fair and

equitable labour standards.8 Our goal was to translate that into the WTO

and move towards global labour standards that abolish illegal activities such

as child labour and worker exploitation. Also, our aim was to support labour

capacity-building activities in countries that have trade relations with

Canada. Canada has a highly educated and skilled labour force, which

7SIMINCA, 2008. Economy of Canada. [Online]

http://www.ic.gc.ca/cis-sic/cis-sic.nsf/IDE/cis-sic71vlae.html

[September 2013]

8Christie, H., 2010. Employment and labour Law in Canada. Gowlings: Doing Business in

Canada Series, April, pp. 1-2.

translates to efficiency in each of the labour intensive markets. Our ultimate

goal was to implement policies that cause countries to prioritise investment

in their labour force, which would result in not only efficient domestic

markets, but spill-over to the global markets and increase efficiency; which

would be beneficial for all role players.

The foundation of our environmental goals was the nation’s progressive

stance on environmental protection. The goal here was to foster the use of

environmentally friendly methods in production globally. Important to note

is the limited jurisdiction of WTO in making environmental laws. In order to

address this, and incentivise countries to be environmentally friendly, we

sought to link the trade policy-making process with compliance with

environmental protection standards.

Also, the goal was to reduce barriers to the production of environmentally

goods, since that usually implies increased costs of production.

This is the mandate that was given to the delegate in this sub-plenum, Ms

Karen Zhang.

Sub-plenum 3: Non-agricultural Market Access (NAMA)

Canada has various non-agricultural markets, which collect significant

amounts of revenue; especially from our NASFTA partner, the USA. The aim

is to extend the reach of these commodities to reach far beyond the

continent; and in cases where we already export to many countries; the goal

is to increase our market share in those commodities.

In order to achieve these goals, reductions on tariffs had to be put in place.

We, consequently, made the reduction of tariffs for oil, minerals, chemicals,

coal, petrol and petroleum products a priority goal.

Led by delegate Mr Kumendra Naidoo, our negotiating aimed to reduce

Canada’s dependence on the USA, in terms of the export of these non-

agricultural. To achieve this goal, we would have to create new trade

agreements, and also use the Comprehensive Economic and Trade

Agreement (CETA) agreement with the European Union to strengthen trade

relations with more European countries and export to them. This we wanted

to achieve through reducing and hopefully eventually eliminating EU tariffs

on chemicals and plastic.

The loss of fellow delegate Mr Richard Orwicz-Urbaniak was tragic for the

delegation and a loss to Canada as a whole. Sadly, we were unable to

effectively follow through with Mr Orwicz-Urbaniak’s goal to advocate for

harmonisation in anti-dumping laws and the removal of non-tariff barriers

(NTB).

It is our recommendation that the delegation to represent Canada at the

WTO negotiations in Cape Town next year continues with Mr Orwicz-

Urbaniak’s great work. In future, we hope to see goals in this regard get

achieved.

Sub-plenum 4: WTO rules: dispute settlement and implementation

Canada is an influential figure in the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism

(DSM); and currently heads this body; under the stewardship of Mr

Jonathan Fried. In light of that, modelling our policies in a way that is

compliant with general WTO and DSM rules is important for the image and

trade relations of Canada.

At the time of commencing with the round of negotiations, Canada had been

party to a number of DSM cases; as a complainant in 33 cases, a

respondent in 17 and an interested third party in 88.9 These figures show

that, in addition to being an active party, Canada is generally does not

infringe WTO regulations.

We negotiated through policy-making with basic primary goal in mind, to

minimise trade disputes involving Canada. Our main areas of focus were

general dispute settlement procedures, transparency in trade, non-

discrimination, and government procurement and competition policy.

Furthermore, our goal was to ensure efficient arbitration and resolution of

disputes arising from inside treaties, to look into violations of the Most

Favoured Nation (MFN) principle, and also strive for competition policies

that facilitate fair trade among countries.

Government procurement policy goals were ensure that Canadian (or any

country for that matter)suppliers are given fair, non-discriminatory

9 World Trade Organisation. 2013. Dispute Settlement: The Disputes. [Online]

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_by_country_e.htm [September 2013].

opportunities to enable them to compete in government procurement

endeavours. Therefore, a global framework that facilitates and governs is a

goal that the delegate in this sub-committee, Mr Ivo Wustrow sought to

achieve.

Sub-plenum 5: TRIPS, TRIMS, e-commerce, technical barriers to trade

The fifth sub-plenum of the WTO is tasked with discussing issues around

the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement,

electronic commerce, Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMS), and the

removal of technical barriers to trade in the global markets.

As the delegate in this sub-plenum, I had a number of goals that I wanted to

achieve for the greater good of Canada. The goals of the Republic of Canada,

which guided the delegation’s negotiation during agenda-setting and early

bargaining, are all outlined below. The main goals were to maintain

Canada’s stance on the protection of intellectual property rights and where

applicable, afford more protection for under-protected patents; to establish

and Canada as a leader in e-commerce markets while liberalising trade.

Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights

With the continuous surge of globalisation, companies can no longer depend

solely on national legislation to protect their interests. This means that

innovation becomes the measure of international competitiveness; and with

innovation comes intellectual property rights as protection. The global

marketplace created by cross-border trade presents new challenges in terms

of patents and intellectual property rights when companies decide to sell

products or to franchise or license intellectual property rights in other

countries. It is thus important that the goals with regard to intellectual

property right be for the protection and maintenance of Canadian

companies’ property rights.

The main goals are as follows:

1. To prevent companies in other countries from illegally duplicating any

pharmaceutical drugs, technology, innovation and any other trade-

related products whose patents held by Canadian developers.

Intellectual property rights are generally granted and protected using

the laws of the country, which means that, by definition, they are only

protected within the nation’s borders. Seeking protection of

intellectual property rights can be a problem due to varying stances

on intellectual property rights. Seeing that a lot of Canada’s creations

are exported to various countries, the aim is to eliminate the risk of

patent violations, through harmonised global intellectual property

standards. Various strategies (which will be discussed at great length

in the next section that deals specifically with strategy) are to be

applied in respect of this. An issue that continues to be particularly

contentious among members is the belief that seeking strong patent

and intellectual property rights protection tends to hinder access to

healthcare products in developing and least developed countries. The

goal at these negotiations is to further the stance held by Canada that

strict laws on intellectual property and healthcare access can co-exist.

For example, as per negotiations at the Doha Conference, countries

with pharmaceutical manufacturing capacity negotiated to be allowed

to create low cost versions of pharmaceutical drugs to developing

countries.10At this round, the delegation aims to further this goal of

increasing access to healthcare drugs while maintaining intellectual

property rights and ensuring that there are no losses for developers in

the nation’s pharmaceutical industry. Complimentary to this goal is

also lobbying for developing countries to supports Canada’s stance on

the protection of intellectual property rights because of the potential

benefits they could gain their healthcare sectors. The ultimate goal is

for these potential benefits to serve as a disincentive to violate

intellectual property rights in these countries where there are

Canadian interests.

2. Increasing access to global markets for Canadian companies. While

the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) does not explicitly

name intellectual property rights, article 1139(g) states that

‘investment’ includes ‘real estate or other property, tangible or

intangible, acquired in the expectation or used for the purpose of

economic benefit.11Patents would fall under the “intangible” category.

This then puts intellectual property rights at the centre of cross-

border investment. Investment and trade is not only determined by

the demand for products, it is also influenced by whether the

developers of products feel that their patents will be protected, should

10Alsegård, E., 2004. Global pharmaceutical patents after the Doha Declaration. SCRIPT-Ed,

1(1), pp. 27-28.

11Correa, C., 2013. Investment Agreements: A New Threat to the TRIPS Flexibilities?. South

Bulletin, 5 May, p. 17.

they decide to expand their market reach by exporting to certain

countries. The aim to draw from the NAFTA agreement, to furthers

Canadian investment goals and interests. Advocating for a firm stance

on intellectual property rights protection globally is a step towards

ensuring that markets previously untapped due to these concerns are

now viable investment options for Canada.

3. To make the granting of intellectual property rights for genetically

modified organisms (GMOs) subject to prior disclosure and

classification. The goal sought by this action is multi-faceted because,

while it is presented as a means to address concerns in GMO markets,

the real and more important result sought is to provide Canada with a

larger market to export GMOs to. A standard framework that requires

disclosure, testing and classification of GMOs for IP purposes provides

Canada a competitive advantage because that framework would be

consistent with existing Canadian laws on genetically modified

organisms, meaning that it will be much easier to comply with it and

be granted global intellectual property rights, in comparison with

other nations that may still have to align their practises with it.

Trade Related Investment Measures

Considering the differences in economic endowment and market

development between developed, developing and least developed countries,

the member states have long expressed a desire to alleviate the situation

(especially in LDCs) in order to liberalize global trade and facilitate

investment across all frontiers.12 However, in an attempt to improve their

economies, while protect domestic producer, developing countries and LDCs

tend to enact laws that require enterprises to favour of domestically

produced goods over imports. The effects of this are distortionary in the

greater scheme of international trade and investment. The Trade Related

Investment Measures (TRIPS) agreements, which aims to prevent any trade

distorting acts of this nature,13 is the guiding document on which all of

Canada’s goals with respect to investments are based.

The main goal is to reduce trade distorting investment incentives with as

little cost to Canada as possible. This involves assistance to developing

countries and LDCs. We want to be able to give assistance to a country

deemed fit by the Trade Ministry of Canada, to improve trade relations with

countries we can benefit from. This, in turn, disincentives them from opting

for trade and investment distorting investment regulations; and allows

Canada unhindered access to investment opportunities. For example,

lowering tariffs on a particular country’sraw materials exports and using

those exports to manufacture goods to export back to that country and they

in turn reduce their tariffs on that product. For this goal, we have worked

12Greenfield, G., 2001. The WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures

(TRIMS). Briefing Paper Series: Trade and Investment, 2(1), pp. 1-3.

13Trade Compliance Center, 2013. [Online]

http://tcc.export.gov/Trade_Agreements/Exporters_Guides/List_All_Guides/WTO_subsidie

s_TRIMs.asp [September 2013].

closely with some European Union members in the sub-plenum, particularly

Slovakia. Lichtenstein and Norway also provided some valuable support.

Technical Barriers to Trade

Also owing to the aforementioned differences and lack of development of

markets in developing countries and LDCs are technical barriers to trade,

which result in inefficiencies and difficulty to access those markets. With the

potential revenue that comes with penetrating those markets, it is important

that Canada’s goal be to strive for the removal of those technical barriers to

trade.

The goal is to improve trade efficiency, once again at as little cost to us as

possible. The general strategy is to assist developing countries and LDCs in

making their customs procedures more efficient, to make it easier for those

countries to import products. Despite being volatile voters at certain sittings,

the Japanese delegation has also assisted in this regard. The offer made to

countries in need is to provide assistance with trade barriers to ensure

efficient markets, reciprocated throughfriendly trade relations.

Lastly, in terms of aid, the goal is to advocate for a system that allows

countries to decide which countries they provided with aid, based on their

trade relations and interests using Official Development Assistance.

E-Commerce

With computer technology advancing and not only connecting people

globally, but also enabling them to trade with each other; e- commerce is an

exponentially growing industry. Between 2007 and 2012, the value of what

Canadians bought and sold online doubled, showing how active Canada is

e-commerce.14 The goal is to negotiate for practises trade agreements that

will place Canada as a leader in e-commerce, and a dominant force in

international e-markets.

The national consultation on digital economy strategy of May 2010, which

aims to “identify the key challenges and the existing core strengths of the

e-commerce market in Canada”,15 provides the guideline for the goals of

Canada with respect to e-commerce.

The goals with regard to e-commerce are to improve e-commerce

infrastructure nationally, to increase Canadians’ access to goods traded

through e-commerce, seeing that Canada consumes more online products

per capita than any other country in the world. The ultimate objective is to

have developed infrastructure that give Canadian businesses a competitive

advantage when expanding to international markets.

14Frank, T., 2013. Canadian Online Sales Doubled, But Still Way Behind the US , Edmonton:

PRWEB.

15Sweet, D., 2012. E-Commerce in Canada: Pursuing the Promise, Ottawa: Publishing and

Depository Services, Public Works and Government Services Canada.

Secondly, in attempt to increase Canada’s market access, the aim is to work

in collaboration with other countries to increase the reach of e-commerce to

previously inaccessible parts of the world. As an exporter of goods through

e-commerce, it is important for Canada to align its goals such that the

products we offer can be bought in as many markets as possible. This

comes at the cost of assisting developing countries (through the Official

Development Assistance) to be more efficient in their e-commerce markets

through, a worthy cost considering the returns that come with increased

access to more efficient markets.

Sub-plenum 6: Inside Treaty Preparation

This is a sub-plenum that was specific to the Cape Town round of

negotiations. It dealt with trade facilitation through inside treaties,

plurilateral and bilateral agreements. Delegates in this sup-plenum were

tasked with harmonizing regulations governing the agreements listed afore.

Our delegate in this sub-plenum, MsNidhiKeerodhur, was mandated with

spearheading negotiations, with the objective of achieving Canada’s goals.

The nature of inside treaties is such that they violate the Most Favoured

Nation (MFN) principle of the WTO. Owing to this characteristic, they apply

to only the signatories if the treaty. These two factors can result in disputes

between the countries involved, the arbitration and settlement of which has

never been adequately encompassed by the regulations of the DSM because

of the lack of a standard framework regulating inside treaties specifically.16

As a result of this, there is a high default risk.

Thus, our goal was to to make inside treaties subject to the condition that

where dispute arise between the countries, they are ruled on by the DSM.

To achieve this, we sought to create a safeguard that stipulates that if

countries default, they will have to adhere to a penalty clause agreed upon

by the signatories. If the complainant still feels aggrieved, then the matter

can be referred to the DSM for ruling.

16Panitchpakdi, S., 2010. Most-Favoured Nation Treatment. Geneva, United Nations.

Overleaf is the comprehensive strategy, which details how we achieved the

goals set for these negotiations. The strategy, albeit being part of general

global trade negotiations, is aimed primarily at prioritising Canadian

interests.

STRATEGY

The strategy we applied in the pursuit of the goals mentioned afore was

multi-pronged. It included our policies, as mandated by the Canadian

government; alliances with existing and potential trade partners and also

the use of developmental initiatives. All these combined went a long way in

assisting us make inroads on the goals we set out for ourselves. Despite our

success, some of the goals we sought were not achieved, due to either

resistance, or time constraints at the negotiations. Nonetheless; we, as the

delegation strategically approached all tasks, and conducted dealings in a

manner that we believe best suited Canadian interests.

Trading Partners and Strategic Alliances

With over 100 delegates present at the negotiations, all to further their

respective nations’ goals; it is inventible that conflicting interests are bound

to surface. I light of this, it was important for the delegation to identify

countries that have mutual interests with Canada, in order to align

ourselves with those countries. This was crucial to ensure support when

matters of Canadian interest arose, there was support and increased

likelihood that policies that benefited Canada and trade partners were

passed.

Canada’s export commodities range widely from vehicles to petroleum; from

telecommunications equipment, chemicals and even agricultural produce to

name a few. Of these exports, the United States of America imports 73%,

with the United Kingdom importing just over 4% of our exports. Majority of

our imports; which include machinery and equipment, and durable

consumer goods to mention a few, come from neighbours the United States

of America. The USA provides 50% of Canada’s imports. Some of our

imports are also sourced from China and Mexico, with the former supplying

10% of Canada’s imports, and 5.5% coming from our neighbours further

South.17 This emphasizes the importance of alliances between Canada and

the countries mentioned afore, especially the USA; something the delegation

did throughout the negotiations. What is important to consider is that,

despite having a considerable degree of in the WTO, Canada’s perhaps does

not have as much power and influence as the other economic and political

powers such as the United States, Japan and China. Furthermore, the

European Union, with 28 member states, tilts the power balance in the

favour of the European bloc. Bearing these factors in mind, our delegation

identified common interests, where we could align ourselves with some, if

not all of these, countries and blocs to further our interests.

United States of America

As one would expect, our closest and most important ally is the USA. In

addition to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), ties were

17Arbulu, M., 2012. Exporting to Canada: A Practical Guide, Ottawa: USDA Foreign

Agricultural Service

strengthened as early as the Bargaining Round, with delegates in each sub-

plenum agreeing to vote together on matters that affected North American

trade. This alliance was carried through to Ministerial Council (MC)

meetings, where votes were often co-ordinated between the two delegations.

With the USA holding 24 votes in a round with 130-odd delegates, their vote

proved crucial in swaying things our way.

Because this is a repeated game, in game theory terms, it was also

important to, while trying to further Canadian interest, also take into

account how that would affect our neighbours. Advocating for policies that

would hurt the American economy while improving ours would be a

precarious approach; hence both delegations reached mutually beneficial

compromises on matters of conflicting interests.

An example of this is the introduction of regulations for the testing of

genetically modified organisms (GMO), a policy that Canada is a proponent

of. The USA, on the other hand, is not as advanced in terms of declaration

and classification of GMOs. Upon request by the American delegation,18 we

agreed to include a moratorium that would allow the USA some time to

make their GMO market sector compliant with the proposed regulation. This

ensured that, while we furthered Canadian interests on policy stance, our

decisions would not detriment our neighbours, who have a large GMO

export volume. Negotiating in this way paved the way for a strategic and

successful alliance between the two countries throughout the negotiations.

18 See Appendix 2

OECD

Canada is also a part of the 34-member Organization for Economic Co-

operation and Development (OECD), whose mission is “to promote policies that

will improve the economic and social well-being of people around the

world”.19 Being a member of such an organization, with members that have

very advanced and strong economies assists Canada in two ways. We are

able to identify common problems and strengths, and devise strategies to

address whatever issues affect our countries. Additionally, we get to

influence the direction of global trade for countries who still have developing

economies. Throughout the negotiations, we worked closely with countries

such as Germany, Estonia and Finland. This was fruitful especially in the

fifth sub-plenum, where we used those ties to further common interests.

Also, in the first sub-plenum, Chile played an instrumental role in devising

the Master Agreement; which is a goal that we had set out to achieve.

Japan

In addition to strengthening existing ties, the creation of new trade relations

was also a priority. From as early as the sub-plenum level, the Japanese

delegation expressed willingness to engage in a co-operative strategy with

Canada.20 This relationship; especially in the patents and e-commerce

subcommittees (where Japan and Canada have mutual interests), was built

on and proved fruitful throughout the round.

19OECD, 2013. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

[Online] http://www.oecd.org/about/ [October 2013].

20 See Appendix 3

The European Union, despite conflicting interests in certain issues such as

geographical indications on goods, was largely co-operative with Canada.

Consequently, in matters of developed-country interest, the EU, Canada and

also the USA presented a united front and voted correspondingly. This plan,

which was also put in motion in the sub-plenum level during agenda-

setting, went a long way in strengthening our Comprehensive Economic and

Trade Agreement(CETA) with the EU.

Asian Pacific Economic (APEC)

Also important to note is that there were issues on the WTO agenda that

were not necessarily of Canada’s primary interest. In matters of this nature,

we identified motions where we could vote with potential trade partners, as a

signalling device of our willingness to foster trade relations. The Asian

Pacific Economic(APEC) Forum, whose more interests are more

developmental compared to ours, made us aware of markets where they

would need Canada’s support. This relationship was entered into, on the

conditions that this would be reciprocated with support for Canada’s

interests; all contingent on the Pareto provisions that either of the countries

are made better off without conflicting with Canada’s interests. With 21

member countries and accompanying votes, APEC proved to be a worthy

alliance, the benefits of which can be further reaped in future.

The use of developmental aid was also crucial to developing trade relations.

Fiji, for example has an economy needs development and we began

negotiations with the Fijian delegate in an attempt build good trade relations

and to get her, among other delegates, to vote with us on certain issues. In

line with our mission to reduce barriers to trade and aid the development of

markets, we offered developmental aid to the South Pacific island. Despite

some initial uncertainty,21 Fiji eventually agreed to this relationship. This is

but one of many examples of our use of developmental aid to create

mutually beneficial alliances.

Cairns Group

The 19-member state Cairns group, which Canadian’s is a member of, has

always been and continues to be a valuable alliance; one that assisted in the

pursuit of mutually beneficial goals.

BRICS

The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) group of nations

has considerable influence among the developing countries, and accounts

for more than 10% of global service imports. 22 This is of particular interest

to Canada, as a major exporter of services. However, the very broad

developmental objective of BRICS often conflicted with Canada’s interests.

China, the more developed of the bunch worked very closely with Canada,

an alliance that had trickle-down down effects on countries that China has

an influence over.

21 See Appendix 4

22Ahmed, S., Wilson, D. & Kelston, A., 2010. Is this the ‘BRICs Decade’?. BRICs Monthly,

3(10), pp. 1-4.

These are but a few of the strategic alliances formed and maintained by the

delegation. It is these alliances that aided the implantation of our strategy,

which detailed overleaf.

Implementation of Strategy

Most of the goals we set for the negotiations were achieved, and various

strategies were applied in making that a reality. Where there were

shortcomings, it was either due to being outvoted or simply because of the

time constraints. The strategy given below is by no means a perfect-fit

approach to furthering Canada’s interests in global markets, and can be

drawn upon by future delegations who may continue to use it or find ways

to improve the strategy and ensure it remains relevant.

Agriculture

Owing to the aforementioned global interests in agriculture, this was always

going to be a contentious topic. In pursuit of the Master Agreement on

Agriculture (hereafter referred to as simply the MA), we negotiated with

countries as early as the agenda-setting round, in an attempt to get them on

board and realise how a harmonised framework governing trade in

agriculture would benefit the world at large.

Because of the spread of candidates across sub-plenums, the strategy we

used was to approach delegates in each of our sub-committees and attempt

to reach mutually beneficial consensus on the MA.

Developing and least developed countries expressed concerns about the idea

of a master agreement, stating that it would be difficult to hold their own in

global markets and comply with the framework because of lack of

infrastructure and development in their agriculture sector.

In order to address the mild opposition to the MA, especially from the

African Union (AU), we dedicated a portion of our developmental aid budget

to giving developing and least developed countries whose agriculture is

under-developed. This would assist them in improving their agriculture, and

thus ensures their concerns are addressed and they do not oppose the

passing of the MA.

In my sub-plenum (5) specifically, Mozambique expressed concerns because

their agriculture industry is among the least developed in the Southern

African (SADC) region. To alleviate this, and also keep in line with our

developmental aid goals, we pledged $200 million to the Republic of

Mozambique,23 for assisting the development of agriculture and

strengthening ties with that nation. Similar pledges were made to developing

and least developing countries, not only in Africa but the rest of the

developing world where we deemed necessary. These include, and are not

limited to pledges made to Lesotho, Costa Rica, Egypt, Senegal and the

Ecuador.24

In order to ensure co-operation with concerned developing countries and

LDCs, we had to get their buy-in on the MA. As a signalling device to show

our commitment to addressing food security concerns, we strategically

collaborated with Japan as early as the agenda-setting round and proposed

the prioritization of food concerns. Canada seconded the Japanese motion

A5: “We agree to discuss tariff and subsidy exemptions based on food

23 See Appendix 5

24 See Appendices 6-10

security concerns”. This helped alleviate concerns from LDCs about their

need to food bring possibly overlooked in the MA.

The MA was eventually passed unanimously, 25replacing the Agreement on

Agriculture from the Doha round of negotiations as a more comprehensive

framework governing agriculture trade.

More importantly it achieved the goals we pursued, and the manner in

which those were achieved is detailed below. The negotiations around the

MA were spearheaded by delegates from Australia, Argentina, Benin,

Belgium, Botswana, Canada, China, the Republic of Chile, Costa Rica,

Ecuador, France, Ghana, Greece, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea,

Mongolia, New Zealand, Poland, South Africa, Spain, United Kingdom of

Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America .

To do a brief recap, our goals were to increase our access to markets, to

protect dairy and grain, to lower tariffs on agriculture exports and to remove

trade distorting agriculture policies.

An excerpt from Article 2 of the MA agrees to “overall average reductions of

bound tariffs are the most fair and balanced method of tariff reduction”,

with developed countries reducing tariffs by 36%, developing countries by

24% and LDCs by 5%.

What this does is that it makes it cheaper for us to export our agricultural

produce to countries, enabling us to access even countries we had been

previously been hindered from exporting to by high tariffs on agricultural

25 See Appendix 11

products. This monumental step was the first of many taken to increase

market access, especially competitive and profitable markets; all in line with

Canada’s main goal.

Also in line with this goal of ensuring trade facilitation in markets, the MA

stipulated the prohibition of export taxes on agricultural products.

With regards to our goal to remove trade distorting market protection

measures, Article 7 included a clause on the regulation of State Trading

Enterprises (STEs); advocated for by the Canadian delegate among others.

The clause mandates member states to notify the Council for Trade in Goods

which agricultural products are covered by STEs and to provide justification

for the introduction and maintenance of STEs for those particular products.

What these provisions achieve is to reduce the excessive market power

granted to SMEs by some governments, which is tantamount to trade

distorting practises. By adding a legal clause that mandates the DSM with

dealing with violations, the MA ensured that there is more transparency in

trade and that trade distorting purposes are sanctionable. In light of this, we

can say that our strategy to remove trade distorting practises in agriculture

served its purpose well.

A mild threat to some of our goods was the insistence of some countries,

particularly the European Union, on restrictions on geographical indications

on certain products (based on origin). We were against this stance as it

would mean that some of our products are driven out of the market. We

advocated that the MA include provisions that ensure that products of

certain denominations are not prevented from using such names, provided

quality standards are met.

For Canada, this means that products which would be threatened by

restrictions on geographical indication by origin - such as some of our

cheese – can compete on global markets.

Also important to our cause was the protection of dairy, a vital part of

Canada’s agriculture sector. The provisions in Article 8 achieve this

purpose, and furthermore, state that “any volume in excess of the quota

amount is thus subject to higher tariffs, this being the over-quota tariff rate”

It is important to note that the success of this entire initiative hinged greatly

on the co-operation of all nations involved, as any deviations would bring us

back to the inconclusive policies from the Doha round. This is why

throughout the entire process of negotiation; our strategy had to include

continuous negotiations with countries that seemed likely to deviate from

the agreement, particularly the South Asian Association for Regional

Cooperation(SAARC) countries. Through developing relations with the

Pakistani delegate, we were able to negotiate mutually beneficial agreements

with the rest of the SAARC region, ensuring the smooth adoption of the MA.

This is a relationship we wish to continue, in many ways; including

developmental aid initiatives by Canada on the sub-continent.

Overall, the Master Agreement on Agriculture was a major success, which

took a lot of strategic negotiation from all delegates involved. It is one that

we can say covered Canadian interests comprehensively.

The second sup-plenum, as previously indicated comprises of services,

labour and environmental standards. Achieving our goals was very

important here, considering that Canada has a big services sector. The

strategies used to achieve those goals made inroads towards affirming our

position as a front-runner in services, labour and environmental standards

Services

As previously discussed, our goals were to liberalize services, in order to

make full use of the competitive advantage that comes with our efficiency

and highly developed services sector.

The financial services sectorcontinues to be an area of particular interest to

Canada, and we were involved in the conception of a motion on the

liberalisation of financial services globally.

Canada has many financial corporations that are multinational in nature,

owing to their successful expansion to all corners of the world.26 Our

strategy was to pass motions that would ensure our companies thrive on

foreign land. The Irish delegation, inherently with the support of the EU,

brought a motion (B67) through to Ministerial Council; and this motion was

aimed at liberalizing the financial services sector.27

26Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada, 2013. Minister Fast Highlights Success of

Canada’s World-Class Financial Services Sector in Southeast Asia, Ottawa: Government of

Canada. [Online] http://www.international.gc.ca/media/comm/news-

communiques/2013/08/22a.aspx?lang=eng

27 See Appendix 12

Included in the motion were provisions for the removal of limitations on

market access of foreign firms and the removal of discriminatory tax

treatment against foreign firms.

The motion, which passed with 154 votes for, 3 against and a single

abstention (achieving a clear two thirds majority) was a great deal of

assistance to our strategy to liberalize financial services trade and create a

profitable market environment for foreign-based financial services provider

of Canadian origin. This was a victory for us in the services sector, with

firms benefiting, together with the host nations.

Tourism services account for nearly 2% of Canada’s GDP. In light of this,

our strategy to reduce barriers to trade in those services included

supporting motions brought to foster trade in tourism. We supported the

eventually successful Motion B9,28which proposed the liberalisation of all

skilled labour sub-sectors of the tourism industry. This not only generates

more revenue for Canada, bust also creates more job opportunities in the

tourism industry; another goal sought in this sub-plenum.

Labour

Some developing countries, especially from the Indo sub-continent were

reluctant to progressive changes in labour standards, due to the fact that

they have relaxed labour laws. However, as Canada, we emphasized the

importance of ensuring that countries that we trade with do not use illegal

means to produce their commodities. It is part of our duty as member of the

28 See Appendix 13

WTO and the global community to do so. The motion we sponsored through

sub-plenum level included abolishing child labour, provisions for labour

overtime, minimum wage and improved conditions of employment. We

pledged aid to developing and least developing countries that needed

assistance in improving their labour markets and standards. Additionally,

we agreed to for consideration of the fact that it would be difficult for these

countries to immediately comply with the regulations. These negotiations

and compromises were fair and resulted in nations who were initially

against it voting for improved labour standards.

Environmental standards

The error in our strategy for environmental standards was depending too

much on other countries with the motions they brought forward, and not

taking as pro-active a stance as we could have. Motion B229, held by

Bangladesh at MC proposed the creation of anEnvironmental Jury that

would regulate emissions and general behaviour with regards to the

environment. However, upon discussions with the EU and the USA we had

concerns that the jury would have too much control over the member states.

The idea (executed by the USA) was to withdraw the motion and defer

comprehensive discussions on environmental standards for a future sitting.

29 See Appendix 14

Non-agricultural Market Access (NAMA)

Tariff reductions were the main goal here, and our strategy was largely

successful. Despite failing to reduce tariffs on oil, due to many countries

viewing oil as a very volatile commodity; we succeeded in reducing tariffs in

various other sectors.

Motion B28,30 held by our strategic ally from the EU: the Netherlands

passed at MC. We also carried through our strategy to reduce tariffs in the

automotive sector which covered both finished products as well as

components that are involved in the manufacturing process and also

garnered support for the B49 Swedish motion for the production of “green”

and eco-friendly vehicles.31

Our strategy at all times had to be cautious in terms of which sectors to

liberalise, because some Asian countries have a competitive advantage over

us in some non-agricultural sectors.

Our key alliances with OECD countries allowed get majority votes in

contentious issues in this sub-plenum. The Canada-EU-USA voting alliance

allowed for many motions to go in our favour and allowed us to further align

our interests, enabling us to better protect our economies.

Proposed quotas on the forestry industry had the potential to cause harm to

our economy. In light of this, we held multiple talks with the Senegalese

delegation; expressing our concerns about how this would affect our

30 See Appendix 15

31 See Appendix 16

economy. An amicable agreement was reached and the motion B63 was

withdrawn. This trade relationship with Senegal is one we wish to continue

in future and we have already made strides to assisting with the

development of the Senegalese economy by pledging $450 million worth of

developmental aid.32

There were other threats to our economy in this sup-plenum, which placed

emphasis on strategic use of our allies to protect our markets. The B65

motion, which proposed the complete elimination of tariffs on the aircraft

industry, would have crippled our economies and also those of the EU and

USA had it passed. After negotiations involving the American and Candian

delegations and some EU states, the Cambodian delegate agreed to

withdraw this motion and work with us in devising a way forward.

While protecting the pharmaceutical industry, it was also unimportant for

us to consider the global need for medication in devising our strategy.

Motion B10,33 which passed early in the negotiations had the dual purpose

of protecting our industry while advocating for access to affordable

pharmaceuticals.

We also succeeded in reducing tariffs for machinery, mechanical appliances,

computers and telecommunications equipment.

Overall, our strategy to liberalize NAMA markets was effective and mostly

went as planned.

32 See Appendices 17-21

33 See Appendix 22

WTO rules: Dispute settlement and implementation

As an influential member of the DSM, Canada prides itself in advocating for

minimization of conflict and compliance with WTO and DSM regulations. In

line with this, our strategy was to wither sponsor or support any motions

that attempted to achieve this goal.

The Cameroonian delegate sponsored a motion that proposed the creation of

a Dispute Settlement Fund for countries that can’t afford the costs of

dispute settlement. This is done in the spirit of the Doha agreement, and in

an attempt to even power dynamics between developed and developing

countries in events of trade disputes. Developed countries were mandated to

annually pledge 0.0005% of GDP towards this purpose. To ensure misuse,

the DSM has to put precautionary and disciplinary measures to prevent

misuse of these funds. We were in support of this undertaking and set aside

the required amount.

Our goal for government procurement programmes going into the

negotiation was to eliminate unfair discrimination in government

procurement schemes. Motion B59 set to create global standards for

government procurement schemes; which would then make governments

culpable before the DSM should they violate the requirements stipulated.

Making sure trade distorting procurement policies are eliminated had long

been our goal, and in order to achieve this, we decided at our weekly

meetings that we would approach various delegates and garner support for

the motion, in order for it to pass with the required majority. The motion

passed, adding to one of the successes of this round of negotiations.

TRIPS, TRIMS, e-commerce, technical barriers to trade

This sub-plenum was always going to be a contentious one, due to the fact

that developed, developing and least developed countries all have major

interests in the issues we were mandated with here. Also, the goals of

developed countries tend to conflict with the interests and aims of

developing countries in many of the matters of discussion here. For

example, intellectual property rights and e-commerce regulations are viewed

by many developing nations as a hindrance to development.

Our strategies had to that and the fact that there was a relatively even

distribution of developed and developing countries in each sub-committee.

Strategy that would seek only to achieve certain goals without adopting a

give-and-take approach would result in a stalemate and render negotiations

this sub-plenum futile.

E-commerce was arguably the most contested sector. Going into the

negotiations I had been tasked with ensuring that intellectual property

rights are protected. Additionally, I had to devise strategies to convince

member states about how reductions in patent duration would

disincentives research and development, which would harm both

innovative companies from the developed countries and also the

developing countries who need e-commerce innovations to improve

themselves.

Together with fellow Canadian from the TBTs sub-committee, Mr

Matthew Alborough, our strategy was to improve that Canada has in

e-commerce markets.

To improve e-commerce trade, we drew up a motion that proposed

classification of e-commerce (seeing that it neither fell within GATT or

GATS), the provision of aid to developing countries and LDC in order to

develop their e-commerce. With this strategy we aimed to two things; the

first being to fulfil Canada’s commitment to assisting countries that need

assistance and foster global trade, the second being that improved e-

commerce markets in developing countries would increase the size of the e-

commerce markets and present opportunities for Canada to extend reach in

e-commerce markets. The motion,34 which was one the first few motions of

the bargaining round, was amended at the sub-plenary sitting. The

amendments made were so substantial that they changed the essence of the

motion. Having initially ‘friendlied’ minor amendments, we had no choice

but to vote against amendments that diluted the motion’s meaning and

effectiveness. Having failed to create a regulatory framework, our strategy

with regards to e-commerce defaulted back to ensuring that patent

durations are not threatened.

Throughout the agenda-setting and bargaining rounds, developed nations

tried to reduce patent duration, and we had to continuously work

strategically with our developed-country allies to ensure this does not

34 See Appendix 23

happen as this would harm our research and development objectives and

also result in lower patent protection and reduced revenue.

Intellectual property rights are at the heart of many developed economies,

dues to major investment in research and development funding. This places

emphasis on protecting intellectual property rights; and with Candada being

leader in innovations such as pharmaceutical products, our strategy with

regards to intellectual property rights had to advocate strongly for protection

of intellectual property rights.

We also directed our focus towards the removal of Technical Barriers to

Trade (TBTs), which continue to present an obstacle to efficiency in global

trade. Upon negotiation, it was agreed that developed countries would

receive assistance in their plight to remover these barriers.

Our strategy in this regard was two-fold; we started by proposing motions to

assist LDCs and developing countries, which stipulated percentages of ODA

dedicated to that purpose and in turn, acted as a signalling device as to how

much developed countries were willing to spend. The second approach was

to identify which proposals were genuine attempts from developing countries

to remove TBTs; and upon assessment decide whether vote for them and

pledge aid to that cause.

At the sub-plenum level, we sponsored the successful motion Z7,35 which

mandated all OECD member states to pledge 3% of their ODA budget to the

removal of trade barriers in developing countries and LDCs. An important

part of our strategy was that we wanted to ensure that ODA is actually use

35 See Appendix 24

for developmental goals and not misappropriated by recipient governments.

To achieve this, we included a clause that makes it compulsory for the aid

recipient to provide a report of the aid expenditure, with accusations

misappropriation of ODA funds ruled on by the DSM.

Motions B34 and B61,36 which were both aimed at removing technical

barriers to trade were major successes at the negotiations. The former

created a panel of experts in financial markets as well as creating a fund

specifically for the purpose of developing financial markets at a cost of only

0.05% of developed countries’ ODA. The European bloc of countries was

initially reluctant to agree to having stipulated amounts of aid, but we had

various talks that resulted in all parties agreeing that this motion would be

to the benefit of donor countries too in the long run. This is a motion we

strongly supported as it achieved two of our goals for us; the first being the

removal of technical barriers to trade, and the second being the resultant

increase in the size of the global financial services sector. The latter

translates to more markets for Canada to penetrate and use out competitive

advantage in financial markets services to raise more foreign revenue.

B66, sponsored by the Chadian delegate in our sub-plenum placed the onus

on developed countries and LDCs in terms of signalling to potential

investors that their markets were not only in need of investments, but also

friendly investment environments. What the motions required nations to do

was to submit market information to a sub-committee of the WTO that

would compile a report and make it available to all member states, in order

36 See Appendices 24 & 26

for states to see where investment is likely to yield profitable and mutually

beneficial results. This motion passed with an overwhelming majority at

Ministerial Council and we as the delegation were pleased with the outcome.

Overall, our strategy was effective in ensuring the protection of intellectual

property rights, and we stuck to the mandate in terms playing a role in the

removal of technical barriers to trade. The strategy employed in the latter

has created new allies for us that have the potential to be beneficial to the

future trade goals of Canada.

Inside Treaty Preparation

Having been tasked with inside treaty preparation, the delegate in this sub-

plenum had two strategic roles to play. Firstly, she needed to ensure that

she fulfils the function of this sub-plenum, which is to regulate inside

treaties. Through alliances with the likes of India, she was able to oversee

the conceptualisation of many agreements that liberalised trade. Her second

strategic role was to take the expertise gained from being involved in treaty

preparation and use it to Canada’s benefits when we entered into inside

treaties and free trade agreements.

We worked with the Nepalese delegation for motion A21,37 which dealt with

trade facilitation, with great success towards creating a framework for inside

treaties. Article 1 of that motion reads as follows: “All inside treaties which

would include Special & Differential Treatment (SDT) consideration must, in

so doing, give specific consideration to the trade-related capacities that

developing and least developed countries have for implementing said

treaties”. The goal achieved by this motion (which passed by an

overwhelming majority) are the creation of a framework that governs

treaties, the creation of a trade environment that reduces power imbalances

between powerful developed countries and developing countries. Also, the

default risk on inside treaties has now been reduced, with measures to

remedy such violations.

37 See Appendix 27

If we are to analyse the results of this sub-plenum, we can observe that the

goals have been met, and inside treaty preparation has been improved. The

strategies employed by all delegates in co-ordinating interests were crucial

and was well executed throughout the negotiations. The delegation is more

than pleased with the efforts of Ms Keerodhur in making sure that Canada’s

interests in treaty matters are put across.

The strategic plan of action was not just limited o sub-plenum specific

action but also included general matters such as developmental aid goals

and agreement, and also the signing of treaties and trade agreements.

Overleaf, our dealings in terms developmental aid and treaties are delved

into.

FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS

The World trade Organisation is a co-ordination game on a global scale.

Countries with mutual interests ought to co-operate in order to achieve their

trade goals and be better off than they were prior to the commencement of

the negotiations. Without allies and trade agreements, it is impossible to

achieve your goals as a nation; to such an extent that the presence of a

delegation would be futile otherwise.

In light of this, we entered into a number of free trade agreements (FTAs) to

assist in achieving our goals, and to also strengthen our ties with other

countries.

India

The driver of global economic growth is research and innovation. If we are to

compete in global markets, Canada needs to prioritize research and

development and maintain ties with countries of mutual interest, for a co-

ordinated approach to improving research and development. In light of this

we entered into a research and development treaty with India.38

Canada pledged $200 million to the development of a research facility.

The primary focus of the treaty is research in food processing mechanisms

and improved methods for the use and creation of renewable energy sources

in agriculture

38 See Appendix 28

This bilateral treaty, which is compliant with the MFN principle, is based on

the fundamental principle of allowing for greater research and development

and economic integration between Canada and India. A quick recap of the

goals for agriculture shows increasing access to the growing markets of

India as a priority. This bilateral aims to achieve that very purpose; and

there is high gain potential for both countries.

Similar bilateral agreements were entered into with Sweden,39 and Brazil40

South Korea

In addition to strategies put in place to ensure Canada’s role in the

liberalization of services, we signed a free trade agreement with South

Korea.41 The agreement aims to remove tariffs and other restrictivetrade

measures between the two countries, to increase movement of natural

persons for employment purposes and only allows domestic subsidies

provided they are compliant with WTO standing rules are not trade

distorting. All these are essential to our cause, seeing that Canadian

multinational companies have invested in Korean markets. This bilateral

also protects intellectual property rights, in line with the TRIPS agreement.

A similar trade agreement was signed with the Philippines,42 and Bolivia.43

39 See Appendix 29

40 See Appendix 30

41 See Appendix 31

42 See Appendix 32

43 See Appendix 33

Chile44

The bilateral agreement signed with the Republic of Chile is for the purpose

of increasing investment opportunities between Canada and Chile.

These free trade agreements from part of the strategy we used to achieve our

trade goals. In addition to the specific issues they deal with, these

agreements are ways to create and maintain trade relationships with other

countries, a strategy that has proved to be fruitful through the support we

have received from trade partners.

44 See Appendix 34

FOREIGN AID BUDGET BREAKDOWN

Canada had a developmental aid budget of $5.7 billion going into the

negotiations. We have spent the entire aid budget on strategic alliances and

the pursuit of development in developing and least developed countries,

whether it was at our discretion or through motions that demanded a

certain portion of aid. Below is a breakdown of how the budget was spent.

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2012. Government of Canada.

[Online] http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/about-

us/publications/economic-publications/alphabetical-listing/an-

overview-of-the-canadian-agriculture-and-agri-food-system-

2013/?id=1331319696826 [September 2013]

2. Ahmed, S., Wilson, D. & Kelston, A., 2010. Is this the ‘BRICs

Decade’?. BRICs Monthly, 3(10), pp. 1-4.

3. Alsegård, E., 2004. Global pharmaceutical patents after the Doha

Declaration. SCRIPT-Ed, 1(1), pp. 27-28.

4. Arbulu, M., 2012. Exporting to Canada: A Practical Guide, Ottawa:

USDA Foreign Agricultural Service

5. Central Intelligence Agency. 2012. Canada. [Online]

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-

factbook/geos/ca.html [October 2013].

6. Christie, H., 2010. Employment and labour Law in Canada. Gowlings:

Doing Business in Canada Series, April, pp. 1-2.

7. Correa, C., 2013. Investment Agreements: A New Threat to the TRIPS

Flexibilities?. South Bulletin, 5 May, p. 17.

8. Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada, 2013. Minister Fast

Highlights Success of Canada’s World-Class Financial Services Sector

in Southeast Asia, Ottawa: Government of Canada. [Online]

http://www.international.gc.ca/media/comm/news-

communiques/2013/08/22a.aspx?lang=eng [October 2013]

9. Frank, T., 2013. Canadian Online Sales Doubled, But Still Way Behind

the US , Edmonton: PRWEB.

10. Greenfield, G., 2001. The WTO Agreement on Trade-Related

Investment Measures (TRIMS). Briefing Paper Series: Trade and

Investment, 2(1), pp. 1-3.

11. Nyezi, S., 2013. Advancing in Global Markets: The Strategy

Report of the Canadian World Trade Organisation Delegation, Cape

Town: University of Cape Town.

12. OECD, 2013. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development (OECD). [Online] http://www.oecd.org/about/ [October

2013].

13. Panitchpakdi, S., 2010. Most-Favoured Nation Treatment.

Geneva, United Nations.

14. SIMINCA, 2008. Economy of Canada. [Online]

http://www.ic.gc.ca/cis-sic/cis-sic.nsf/IDE/cis-sic71vlae.html

[September 2013]

15. Sweet, D., 2012. E-Commerce in Canada: Pursuing the Promise,

Ottawa: Publishing and Depository Services, Public Works and

Government Services Canada.

16. The World Bank, 2013. Data: GDP (current US$), Washington

DC: The World Bank Group. [Online]

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD [October

2013].

17. Trade Compliance Center, 2013. [Online]

http://tcc.export.gov/Trade_Agreements/Exporters_Guides/List_All_

Guides/WTO_subsidies_TRIMs.asp [September 2013].

18. UNData, 2013. Country profile: India, New yor: United Nations

Statistics Division. [Online] http://data.un.org/ [October 2013]

19. World Trade Organisation. 2013. Dispute Settlement: The

Disputes. [Online]

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_by_country_e.ht

m [September 2013].