• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Canada-CARICOM "Trade-not-Aid" Strategy: Important and Achievable
 

Canada-CARICOM "Trade-not-Aid" Strategy: Important and Achievable

on

  • 932 views

As Canada seeks to leverage the forces of private enterprise in support of international development goals, it should negotiate trade agreements with both low- and middle-income countries that address ...

As Canada seeks to leverage the forces of private enterprise in support of international development goals, it should negotiate trade agreements with both low- and middle-income countries that address obstacles to fostering trade. Current talks with Caribbean countries can meet this important objective.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
932
Views on SlideShare
932
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Canada-CARICOM "Trade-not-Aid" Strategy: Important and Achievable Canada-CARICOM "Trade-not-Aid" Strategy: Important and Achievable Document Transcript

    • Institut C.D. HOWE I n sti tute commentary NO. 371 A Canada-CARICOM“Trade-not-Aid” Strategy:Important and Achievable As Canada seeks to leverage the forces of private enterprise in support of international development goals, it should negotiate trade agreements with both low- and middle-income countries that address obstacles to fostering trade. Current talks with Caribbean countries can meet this important objective. Phil Rourke
    • The Institute’s Commitment to QualityA bout The C.D. Howe Institute publications undergo rigorous external reviewAuthor by academics and independent experts drawn from the public and private sectors.Phil Rourkeis Executive Director of The Institute’s peer review process ensures the quality, integrity andthe Centre for Trade Policy objectivity of its policy research. The Institute will not publish anyand Law (CTPL). The Centre study that, in its view, fails to meet the standards of the review process.is co-sponsored by the The Institute requires that its authors publicly disclose any actual orNorman Paterson School of potential conflicts of interest of which they are aware.International Affairs (NPSIA)at Carleton University and In its mission to educate and foster debate on essential public policythe Faculty of Law at the issues, the C.D. Howe Institute provides nonpartisan policy adviceUniversity of Ottawa. to interested parties on a non-exclusive basis. The Institute will notHe is also Principal Advisor endorse any political party, elected official, candidate for elected office,to the Shridath RamphalCentre for International or interest group.Trade Law, Policy and Servicesat the University of West As a registered Canadian charity, the C.D. Howe Institute as a matterIndies (Cave Hill). of course accepts donations from individuals, private and public organizations, charitable foundations and others, by way of general and project support. The Institute will not accept any donation that stipulates a predetermined result or policy stance or otherwise inhibits its independence, or that of its staff and authors, in pursuing scholarly activities or disseminating research results. . HOWECommentary No. 371 .D C INJanuary 2013 T INSTITU S T ITTrade and International UT EPolicy ues E sse Finn Poschmann iti q n ti pol al Vice-President, Research les Po yI s lic ur nt elli les ge n sab ce | C s pe n o n seils i n d i$ 12.00isbn 978-0-88806-891-0issn 0824-8001 (print);issn 1703-0765 (online)
    • The Study In BriefCanada’s trade with countries of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) is small. Yet because the regionis one in which Canada has significant interests – including major Canadian investments in the region– and where it can make a difference, Canada’s approach to the current trade negotiations with CARICOMassumes a broader importance in its trade negotiating and international development strategies.Trade negotiations with CARICOM have progressed at an uneven pace since their launch in 2007, in partdue to severe stresses in the region in the wake of the global recession of 2008/2009. This paper proposes apractical strategy to spur the talks to a successful conclusion. The strategy involves finding agreements on afew key practical issues first, upon which the more general framework for open trade can be built.The Commentary proposes that Canada work with CARICOM to address concerns about the abilityof firms in the Caribbean to benefit from more open trade with Canada. This would include launchinga process to address regulatory barriers to trade in rum, and re-focusing Canada’s current monetaryassistance to the region on Caribbean trade-related development priorities, in the context of implementinga bilateral deal. With much of the potential for bilateral trade growth concentrated in services, Canadacould also accept the Caribbean’s more limited “positive list” approach to services liberalization, whileengaging with the region on broader long-term services liberalization efforts. Cultural trade – important tothe Caribbean but a sensitive issue for Canada – could be promoted through cultural exchanges andco-productions.Canada could evoke the need to enhance the region’s economic stability and innovative capacity insecuring wider protection for investment and intellectual property. Canada and CARICOM should alsoaddress practical impediments to two-way mobility of skilled labor, a topic which will gain in importancein future trade negotiations generally. Finally, Canada should adopt a less high-handed approach withrespect to the commitment it seeks from CARICOM on labor and environmental standards, as these areunlikely to become issues in practice.C.D. Howe Institute Commentary© is a periodic analysis of, and commentary on, current public policy issues. Barry Norris andJames Fleming edited the manuscript; Yang Zhao prepared it for publication. As with all Institute publications, the viewsexpressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Institute’s members or Board ofDirectors. Quotation with appropriate credit is permissible.To order this publication please contact: the C.D. Howe Institute, 67 Yonge St., Suite 300, Toronto, Ontario M5E 1J8. Thefull text of this publication is also available on the Institute’s website at www.cdhowe.org.
    • 2The Canadian government is currently conducting a reviewof trade negotiation priorities for its 2013 Global CommerceStrategy (Canada 2012b). From a strictly commercial interestviewpoint, Canada’s trade relations with the CaribbeanCommunity (CARICOM)1 do not merit inclusion in thispriority list, but there are good reasons why they should be.The priority list likely will include such diverse framework. I begin by looking at the Canada-countries as India, South Africa, Turkey, and CARICOM trade relationship, why the currentmembers of the Trans-Pacific Partnership such as bilateral trade negotiations were started, and theVietnam. A successful trade strategy with these main challenges to confirming an agreement. I thencountries, however, will require new thinking on discuss what would be required, at a minimum, tohow to deal with political, economic, and cultural complete the negotiations. Finally, I recommenddifferences that Canada typically does not face ways to design an agreement that promotes awhen dealing with the United States or other strategic trade and development partnershipdeveloped countries. That is where the Canada- between Canada and the CARICOM countries.CARICOM negotiations can play a key role inCanada’s trade aspirations: they will help us build The C a na da-C A R ICOM Tr a dea better framework for current and future trade R el ationshipnegotiations between developed and developingcountries. Discussions on this subject point to a Two-way merchandise trade between Canadastrategic partnership on trade and development and CARICOM more than doubled during theissues that can serve as a model for how countries 2000–2010 period from $936.2 million to $2.4can work together for mutual economic gain. billion (Canada 2012a), but this figure representsEventually, this could lead to a resolution of the only a fraction of 1 percent of Canada’s total annualcontinuing quandary of how to implement an trade. Putting this in context, more merchandiseeffective “trade-not-aid” strategy. In this context, the trade takes place between Canada and its largesteffort is worth the potential gain. trading partner, the United States, in a typical 36- In this Commentary, I examine the challenges of hour period than in a full year between Canada andcreating a new trade and development negotiation the CARICOM countries. Despite its small size, The author thanks John Curtis, Philippe Bergevin, Ramesh Chaitoo, Laura Dawson, Norman Girvan, Michael Hart, Keith Nurse, John Rapley, Bill Robson, Sir Ronald Sanders, Daniel Schwanen, and others who wish to remain anonymous, for their comments on earlier versions of this paper. The ideas, recommendations, and any errors that may remain in the paper are entirely the author’s responsibility.1 The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) consists of 15 member states: Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, Saint Lucia, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago.
    • 3 Commentary 371however, Canada’s relationship with CARICOM involve greater numbers of Canadian firms in theranks in the same category as that with Colombia region. These services flows are deeply importantand Peru – countries with which Canada has to the bilateral commercial relationship, and theynegotiated and implemented trade agreements in represent emerging opportunities.recent years. These agreements have been modestly The Canada-CARICOM commercialsuccessful in improving prospects for trade and relationship historically has been one of relativelyinvestment and increasing bilateral engagement few disagreements. What brought the two sides(Canada 2012c). together this time is the nonreciprocal nature CARICOM countries view Canada through a of goods trade under the 1986 CARIBCANsimilar lens. Canada is the third most important Agreement and the need to modernize themarket for CARICOM-based goods, after the agreement before its 2011 expiry date. The objectiveUnited States and the European Union (primarily of the agreement is to encourage CARICOM-the United Kingdom). The relative importance, based trade with Canada. Under the agreement,however, of each market to CARICOM’s trade CARICOM-based firms get duty-free access tois significant: the United States is the market of the Canadian market with some exceptions, whilechoice for more than 50 percent (and growing) of Canadian firms have no corresponding preferentialall CARICOM exports. In contrast, the relative access. Since the agreement is nonreciprocal, itshares of CARICOM goods being shipped to the contravenes World Trade Organization (WTO)EU (approximately 12 percent) and Canada (less rules, and therefore requires a waiver from thethan 4 percent) are modest and have been trending WTO to be implemented.downward in recent years. The one important The CARICOM countries’ tariff-free access todifference is that Canada is the only developed the Canadian market is now threatened, however,country market with which CARICOM has a because the waiver is granted only for a specifictrade surplus. period of time and only if all WTO members agree Services and related investments are the most (the waiver on the CARIBCAN arrangementimportant part of the bilateral trade relationship. was extended for two years, to December 2013).Trade in services represents more than $3 billion The possibility then exists that the waiver will beannually and Canadians have $73 billion in direct rejected and tariffs on Caribbean goods cominginvestments in the region (Gauthier and Meredith into Canada will snap back to WTO levels.2011 and 2012a), including in “offshore financial Although most CARICOM goods already entercenters” such as the Bahamas and Barbados (Lavoie the Canadian market duty free due to Canada’s2005).Three of Canada’s largest banks – CIBC, relatively low WTO tariff regime, predictability ofRoyal Bank of Canada, and Scotiabank – dominate costs is always preferred for stable markets.in the region.2 Important in the broader services Negotiating a fully reciprocal agreementtrading relationship are tourism and the temporary would also provide an opportunity to deal withmovement of people. The latter traditionally has services, investment, intellectual property rights,consisted mainly of CARICOM nationals seeking and other regulatory frameworks that promotework opportunities in Canada (particularly to the development of a knowledge-based economy.address labour shortage gaps), but has grown to Both Canada and CARICOM enjoy benefits in2 See CIBC (2011); Royal Bank of Canada (2011); and Scotiabank (2011).
    • 4these areas through the WTO. But until new life instrument of governments to demonstrate theiris breathed into the Doha Round of multilateral level of seriousness in a bilateral relationship.trade negotiations, a bilateral deal is the best way to Commercial interests, as a result, frequently becomefurther open markets. secondary to a broader political engagement To address these and related issues, Canada strategy. Moreover, in the Canada-CARICOMand CARICOM launched free trade negotiations context, the value of the interconnecting webs ofin 2008. Five formal rounds of negotiations have political, economic, and people linkages has alwayssince taken place. As a result of the time frame of been assumed to be greater than the sum of theirthe current WTO waiver, the unofficial deadline individual parts. Launching free trade negotiationsfor the negotiations is December 2013. Both sides is just the latest example in a history of attempts tohave agreed to an ambitious schedule to try to meet leverage these relationships (see Canada 2007).that deadline, but an agreement in time is unlikely Because the two sides have not acknowledgedwithout a significant change in approach. that the proposed solution – a conventional free trade deal – would not solve the problem, it isWhy the Slow Progr ess to Date? assumed that they are not trying hard enough to get a deal. The real problem is that CARICOMCountries enter trade negotiations to address a countries are not in a position to gain significantlyset of commercial problems that they cannot solve from an agreement. Firm size, a lack of a critical massthrough other measures and to set the future rules of competitive firms and domestic suppliers, weakof the game for their trade relationships. Trade governance, underfunding of trade institutions,negotiations move quickly and efficiently when the and limited integration into increasingly powerfulagenda is clear, there are significant commercial global supply chains combine to make it difficultgains to be achieved by both sides, and the deadline for Caribbean-based firms to compete (see Persaudis fixed (with negative implications for both sides if 2009). Many countries are also looking inward, notit is not reached). outward, as a result of the impact of the financial None of these conditions is present in the crisis. Fundamentally, domestic economic reformCanada-CARICOM negotiations. There is no at this time would go a lot further to release theagreed negotiation agenda, although the key areas entrepreneurial spirit across the region than anyhave been identified and several proposals have business opportunity outside the region.been tabled. The commercial gains on both sides The bilateral negotiations continue becauseare marginal: some Canadian firms are looking governments do not like giving up on tradefor increased access, but most companies that are negotiations once launched, especially if theinterested in the region are satisfied with current deadline is almost a year away and there is a chanceaccess; and of the few CARICOM firms that are to extend it. So if both sides want a deal, where doready to export, most are more focused on staying they go from here?competitive in their own markets than lookingbeyond their borders. Further, the 2013 deadline is Get ting a De a l Doneassumed to have some elasticity because previousWTO waivers were approved. The first step is an agreement that addresses at Both sides were aware of these challenges before least the minimum test of WTO compliancelaunching negotiations. But they persevered because to neutralize the waiver issue. The negotiationsfree trade negotiations have become the preferred should begin by narrowing the agenda mostly
    • 5 Commentary 371to goods and goods-related issues – for example, assistance would likely be acceptable to CARICOMstandards, rules of origin, and trade facilitation. countries on these and other goods.There should also be an understanding that Canadawill provide technical assistance to support the A Forwa r d -look ing Tr a de a ndimplementation of the agreement. The rationale is De v elopment Agr eementstraightforward: trade agreements have value onlyif they are implemented. Yet CARICOM countries With these issues resolved and the WTOhave significant capacity constraints on effective compliance test achieved, the negotiations thenimplementation and need some assistance. It is in could focus on a substantive trade and developmentCanada’s interests to provide it. agenda. Here is a seven-point plan to get there. The advantage of this approach is that if acomprehensive deal does not take shape before the 1. Agree to negotiate a link between “trade” andwaiver expires, both sides can shift gears and put “development”together a limited deal to satisfy the WTO. The The Caribbean has been identified as a prioritygoal would be to no longer have the waiver hanging for Canadian development assistance since Primeover the negotiation process. Minister Stephen Harper’s 2007 commitment of To begin, each side should address each other’s more than $600 million to the region (Canadakey “goods” issue. CARICOM countries want 2007). Sustainable economic growth – whichCanada to eliminate its tariffs and reduce, if not includes private-sector development and soundeliminate, a number of nontariff barriers on rum commercial policy – is also a strategic priorityproducts. The situation is complicated by the fact for Canadian development assistance. Canadathat one such barrier – the listing, distribution, is therefore interested, and already engaged, inand pricing practices of liquor boards – falls a trade and development agenda in the region.under provincial jurisdiction. Federal-provincial The main obstacle so far has been CARICOM’scooperation therefore would be required to resolve insistence that a specific financial commitment forCARICOM’s most important goods-related development be written into the agreement. Canadaissue. The federal government could help by is opposed to this because it does not want to bindfinancing trade development measures to promote future governments to a specific financial figurecooperation between CARICOM rum producers in an international treaty. Canada also argues thatand Canadian wine and microbrewery producers trade-related assistance is already available throughwho face similar liquor board practice challenges. the $600 million commitment.As the old negotiating adage goes, the strongest The practical way forward is for CARICOMpressure that can be brought to bear in trade to identify specific trade-related programs thatnegotiations comes from domestic constituents. would best address its “trade and development” For its part, Canada is interested in the reduction needs. Both sides then could develop appropriateof tariffs by CARICOM countries on a number programming, to be financed within the currentof industrial and agricultural goods (Canada Canadian development assistance commitment to2012a). Adopting the approach used under the the region. Canada could signal that, initially, itCARIFORUM-European Union Economic would consider contributions to trade agreementPartnership Agreement (EPA) of long phase-out implementation programs proportional to thoseperiods for tariffs and a commitment to technical
    • 6committed by the EU under the CARIFORUM- those sectors listed) rather than Canada’s preferredEU EPA.3 A larger amount could also be justified “negative list” approach (listing only those sectorsonce it was demonstrated to lead to practical results. not covered under the agreement). The negative list The terms for development cooperation could be approach is simpler and more liberalizing because itset out in an exchange of letters or a similar means. applies to all sectors not listed. But the WTO hasMonitoring the use of funds could be accomplished adopted a positive list approach, so both options arethrough mechanisms such as those provided in possible solutions. If Canada agreed to a “positivethe Technical Cooperation chapters of both the list” – the preferred CARICOM approach – itCanada-Colombia and Canada-Peru free trade would help move the discussions forward.agreements. This would promote the strategic use The next step would be to address barriersof funds and responsibility on both sides to ensure to services trade, particularly those related toprogramming effectiveness. recognition of foreign credentials. This is a difficult issue to address since such recognition is done2. Address trade in services mainly at the provincial level and by professional self-regulating bodies. The work, however, needs toAny Canada-CARICOM trade agreement would be done, and Canada’s free trade agreements withhave to include commitments on trade in services, Colombia, Peru, and Panama provide a frameworkgiven the relative importance of services in today’s for addressing these issues in an agreement witheconomies, their long-term potential for growth, CARICOM. Progress then could be made throughand the relative strengths of firms in the sector. a targeted strategy with technical and capacity-The key issues are how to: (a) schedule those building support.commitments; (b) address obstacles to growth inexport markets (for example, how the lack of mutual 3. Undertake a side agreement on cultural/creativerecognition of qualifications acts as effective barrier industriesto trade); and (c) address the relative strengthsand weaknesses between Canada and CARICOM Addressing trade issues with respect to the culturalservices providers. industries presents particularly difficult challenges, The Canada-CARICOM negotiations could as commercial and social policy objectives conflict.provide an opportunity to introduce work being At the same time, as an area of relative strengthdone at the WTO on a potential plurilateral where CARICOM countries see opportunitiesagreement on services. In these discussions, Canada for export, progress in the negotiations is likely ifand 15 other “real good friends” of services trade accommodations can be found on both sides.liberalization are attempting to reach a deal that Canada’s cultural policies predate the Interneteventually could become multilateral under the age. Clearly, they need to be revised and updated toWTO 4 A key consideration is whether to adopt acknowledge the ways cultural content are produceda “positive list” approach (liberalization of only and transmitted today. The issue will not be solved3 The EPA provides for €72million (approximately C$93 million) in trade-related technical and capacity building assistance. Given than the gross domestic product of the European Union is approximately 11 times that of Canada, the proportional Canadian dollar figure would be about $8.5 million. See Cariforum-EU Business Forum (2009).4 Washington Trade Daily, March 6, 2012.
    • 7 Commentary 371anytime soon, however – and certainly not within is serious about attracting investment. This in turnthe context of the Canada-CARICOM trade builds confidence in the trade regime beyond thenegotiations. An alternative model therefore needs borders of the bilateral trade agreement partners.to be found. Currently, Canada has FIPAs with Barbados and The “Protocol on Cultural Cooperation” in the Trinidad and Tobago. An investment chapter couldCARIFORUM EPA is a good starting point. This broaden that list to all 15 CARICOM countries.framework provides a mechanism for technical This would signal to the international businessassistance cooperation outside the strict confines community that the region was looking outward forof a trade agreement. A properly structured side partners to assist with its economic development. Itagreement could open commercial opportunities could also increase the confidence level of Canadianin this sector without compromising Canada’s investors, thereby increasing the prospects of moreposition on cultural industries in other trade trade with the region over the longer term.agreements. To give substance to the agreement,both sides could agree to bilateral initiatives 5. Enforce intellectual property rights andon cultural cooperation. For example, in lieu of promote innovationtemporary entry commitments for professionalsin the cultural industries (which Canada It is easier to make the case that enforcingtraditionally exempts from trade agreements), intellectual property rights is in a country’s bestcultural exchanges involving such professionals interests if its inventors are benefiting fully fromcould be funded through the cultural cooperation the commercialization of their ideas. Promotingagreement. A similar approach could be used innovation in the CARICOM countries andto address CARICOM’s interest in film co- supporting it through an innovation developmentproduction agreements. The framework could be fund would be an important step toward increasingused as the basis for negotiation of an audio-visual the number of stakeholders in intellectual propertyco-production agreement and other initiatives of protection.mutual interest in the cultural industries. CARICOM proposals linking innovation and intellectual property look promising, particularly those on how to engage Canadian firms in building4. Improve and enforce investment rules the region’s innovative capacity. The chapter onIn today’s world, trade frequently follows investment. intellectual property rights thus should includeCountries seeking to increase trade therefore some of the language being proposed, particularlymust deal with the relative competitiveness of in support of bilateral initiatives on innovationtheir investment regimes. Investment chapters capacity development.in bilateral trade agreements are important for anumber of reasons. They provide greater certainty 6. Ease labour mobilityabout investment rules and their enforcement,and typically they include dispute settlement Canada is involved in a global search for talent tomechanisms to address common investment meet the challenges of knowledge-based economicissues (such as expropriation). When negotiated growth and the increasing shortage of skilledas part of a foreign investment protection and workers (see Chase 2012). Much of the attentionpromotion agreement (FIPA), they also indicate so far has been on the Philippines, China, andto the investors’ world that the developing country India, the three most important sources of skilled
    • 8workers for Canada. Although the contribution commitments would reduce their policy flexibility,of the Caribbean is small, it also continues to be an argument, however, that is not consistent witha significant source of talent for Canada. Thus, an similar commitments they have already made underemphasis on improving labour mobility within the CARIFORUM-EU EPA.a Canada-CARICOM trade and development CARICOM has raised a legitimate concerncontext could lead to mutual gains. about the possibility of sanctions of up to $5 million The movement of skilled workers across under a proposed agreement on labour cooperation.national borders is one of the big issues that must In Canada’s trade agreements with Peru andbe addressed in future trade negotiations. This is Colombia, for example, such sanctions could beparticularly important for developing countries, enacted if the member state were found throughwhich continue to experience a significant “brain an independent review to have failed effectively todrain.” Issues such as the portability of social implement its labour laws. The country then wouldbenefits across borders, access to health services on a be required to deposit the penalty in a fund tocommercial basis in another country, and the ability improve its labour laws to a specific standard.to work in multiple jurisdictions are important for But are such sanctions really necessary? Thereboth sides. has never been a case of sanctions, or even a Portability of social benefits, for example, discussion of launching an investigation, in anyis seen as a way to encourage Canadians to other free trade agreement that Canada has signed.move temporarily to the region to seek business Canada’s agreement with Costa Rica does notopportunities without the risk of losing their include such sanctions, so why should an agreementunemployment insurance or healthcare coverage. with CARICOM do so, particularly since all of itsCARICOM sees mutual recognition agreements members are signatories to ILO conventions that(MRAs) as an opportunity to open up the commit them to the same objectives? Canada’sCanadian market to Caribbean-based professionals expected flexibility on labour and environmentwho otherwise cannot work in Canada because issues in its negotiations with India suggests thattheir credentials are not recognized. there is room for a deal if CARICOM comes up with a proposal acceptable to its members.7. Improve labour and environmental cooperation ConclusionCanada is seeking side agreements with CARICOMon labour and environmental standards, particularly Firms need every advantage to compete incommitments similar to those included in Canada’s today’s international markets. Using the samefree trade agreements with Colombia, Peru, trade agreement template works well for the bigHonduras, and Panama. These commitments are players, but not necessarily in negotiations betweenlimited to an agreement by both sides to respect developed and developing countries.each other’s domestic laws and regulations and On a strictly commercial interest basis, theinternational commitments – for example, to the Canada-CARICOM trade negotiations as currentlyInternational Labour Organization (ILO) – in conceived do not justify the effort being put intothese areas. The commitments include aspirational them. But such a deal would be justified if it werelanguage for increased standards, but no firm framed as a forward-looking trade and developmentcommitments to make changes. Some CARICOM agreement that helped CARICOM countriesmembers are concerned that making such integrate more fully into the world economy.
    • 9 Commentary 371 The Canada-CARICOM negotiations are a through the recently negotiated CARIFORUM-chance to design a trade agreement that gives both EU Economic Partnership Agreement. Asides a competitive advantage, creates opportunities strategic partnership as outlined in this paperfor strategic partnerships, and improves prospects between Canada and the region is also likely to befor negotiations with other trading partners. A better than what may emerge from the eventualwell-conceived agreement also could lead to the renegotiation of CARICOM’s trade relationshipeconomic growth and development required for a with the United States. The creation of a strategicmutually beneficial “trade-not-aid” strategy between partnership is the fundamental challenge for boththe developed and developing worlds. Canada and CARICOM in these negotiations and Such an innovative approach would be an the reason it is worth the effort.improvement on what the European Union offered
    • 10R efer encesCanada. 2007. “New Initiatives Aimed at Strengthening CIBC. 2011. Strong Fundamentals in a Changing World: Canada’s Historic Relationships with Members of 2011 Annual Report. Toronto. Available online at: the Caribbean Community (CARICOM).” Address https://www.cibc.com/ca/pdf/about/ar11-en.pdf. by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, July 19. Available Gauthier, Alexandre, and Katie Meredith. 2011. online at: http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/media. Canada-Caribbean Community and Common asp?id=1763. Market (CARICOM). Library of Parliament,———. 2012a. Department of Foreign Affairs and Canada, Publication 2011-104-E. Retrieved International Trade Canada. “Canada-CARICOM at: http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ Relations: Fact Sheet.” Ottawa, July. Available ResearchPublications/2011-104-e.pdf. online at: http://www.international.gc.ca/americas- Lavoie, François. 2005. Canadian Direct Investment ameriques/canada_caricom/canada_caricom. in “Offshore Financial Centers.” Statistics Canada aspx?lang=eng&view=d. Analytical Paper, cat. 11-621-MIE No. 21. Ottawa:———. 2012b. Department of Foreign Affairs Minister of Industry, retrieved at: http://www. and International Trade. “Harper Government statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-621-m/11-621-m2005021- Launches Next Phase of Canada’s Pro-Trade Plan eng.pdf. for Jobs, Growth and Long-Term Prosperity.” Persaud, Avinash. 2009. “A Caribbean Future.” Ottawa. Available online at: http://www. Statement at the WB-OAS Conference, international.gc.ca/media_commerce/comm/news- Kingston, Jamaica, February 17–18. Available communiques/2012/05/26a.aspx?view=d. online at: http://www.crnm.org/index.———. 2012c. Department of Foreign Affairs and php?option=com_docman&task=doc_ International Trade. “Negotiations and Agreements, download&gid=593&Itemid=113. 20 June.” Ottawa. Available online at: http://www. Royal Bank of Canada. 2011. 2011 Annual Report. international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords- Toronto. Available online at: http://www.rbc.com/ commerciaux/agr-acc/index.aspx?view=d. investorrelations/pdf/ar_2011_e.pdf.Cariforum-EU Business Forum. 2009. “Recommendations Scotiabank. 2011. Strategy in Action: 2011 Annual Report. and Findings on ICT: Reaping the Benefits of the Toronto. Available online at: http://www.scotiabank. EPA.” Available online at: http://acpbusinessclimate. com/ca/common/pdf/ir_and_shareholders/280183_ org/pseef/Documents/Cariforum-EU-EN-3.pdf. Scotia_ENG_AR.pdf.Chase, Steven. 2012. “The world is going to shift.” Globe Washington Trade Daily. 2012. 21: 5. March. Accessed at: and Mail, November 10, p. 4. www.washingtontradedaily.com
    • Notes:
    • Notes:
    • R ecent C.D. How e Instit ute Public ationsDecember 2012 Robson, William B.P. Ottawa’s Pension Abyss: The Rapid Hidden Growth of Federal-Employee Retirement Liabilities. C.D. Howe Institute Commentary 370.December 2012 Crow, John. Seeking Financial Stability: The Best Role for the Bank of Canada. C.D. Howe Institute Commentary 369.December 2012 Found, Adam, and Peter Tomlinson. Hiding in Plain Sight: the Harmful Impact of Provincial Business Property Taxes. C.D. Howe Institute Commentary 368.November 2012 Schwanen, Daniel. “Speed Dating or Serious Courtship? Canada and Foreign State-Owned Enterprises.” C.D. Howe Institute E-Brief.November 2012 Johnson, David R. “Are Middle Schools Good for Student Academic Achievement? Evidence from Ontario.” C.D. Howe Institute E-Brief.November 2012 Blomqvist, Åke, and Colin Busby. Long-Term Care for the Elderly: Challenges and Policy Options. C.D. Howe Institute Commentary 367.November 2012 Robson, William B.P., and Alexandre Laurin. “Federal Employee Pension Reforms: First Steps – on a Much Longer Journey.” C.D. Howe Institute E-Brief.October 2012 Cross, Philip, and Philippe Bergevin. Turning Points: Business Cycles in Canada since 1926. C.D. Howe Institute Commentary 366.October 2012 Blomqvist, Åke, and Colin Busby. How to Pay Family Doctors: Why “Pay per Patient” is Better Than Fee for Service. C.D. Howe Institute Commentary 365.October 2012 Dachis, Benjamin. Stuck in Place: The Effect of Land Transfer Taxes on Housing Transactions. C.D. Howe Institute Commentary 364.October 2012 Laurin, Alexandre. “Tuer la poule aux oeufs d’or : Les impacts des hausses d’impôt proposées au Québec.” C.D. Howe Institute E-Brief.September 2012 Bergevin, Philippe, and William B.P. Robson. More RRBs, Please! Why Ottawa Should Issue More Inflation-Indexed Bonds. C.D. Howe Institute Commentary 363.September 2012 Fancy, Tariq. “Can Venture Capital Foster Innovation in Canada? Yes, but Certain Types of Venture Capital Are Better Than Others.” C.D. Howe Institute E-Brief.Support the Instit uteFor more information on supporting the C.D. Howe Institute’s vital policy work, through charitable giving ormembership, please go to www.cdhowe.org or call 416-865-1904. Learn more about the Institute’s activities andhow to make a donation at the same time. You will receive a tax receipt for your gift.A R eputation for Independent, Nonpa rtisa n R ese a rchThe C.D. Howe Institute’s reputation for independent, reasoned and relevant public policy research of thehighest quality is its chief asset, and underpins the credibility and effectiveness of its work. Independence andnonpartisanship are core Institute values that inform its approach to research, guide the actions of its professionalstaff and limit the types of financial contributions that the Institute will accept.For our full Independence and Nonpartisanship Policy go to www.cdhowe.org.
    • C.D. HOWE In stitute67 Yonge Street, Suite 300, Toronto, Ontario M5E 1J8