Report

 

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

A delegation of three parliamentarians from the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association travelled to Brussels, Belgium, for the 32^nd European Parliament-Canada Inter-parliamentary Meeting between the Association and the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Canada (DRC). The delegation was led by Association President, David Tilson, Member of the House of Commons and included Paule Brunelle and Maurice Vellacott, both Members of the House of Commons.  The delegation was accompanied by association secretary Philippe Méla and advisor Karin Phillips.

In addition to meetings with the DRC, the delegation met with senior officials from the Council of the European Union, the Vice President of the European Parliament (EP), chairpersons or rapporteurs of key EP committees and officials from Canada’s Mission to the European Union (EU) and the Permanent Mission of Spain to the European Union. The delegation heard the views of senior officials from the European Commission, who participated in the working meetings with the DRC. The delegation also had the opportunity to meet with Dr. Sven Biscop, Director, Security and Global Governance Programme, Egmont-Royal Institute for International Relations. Finally, the delegates were honoured with two lunches hosted respectively by DRC Chairman Philip Bradbourn and Stavros Lambrinidis, Vice-President of the European Parliament.

Delegation members were also deeply honoured to participate in Belgium’s official Armistice Day Ceremony, which took place at the Menin Gate in Ypres on 11 November, 2009. As head of the delegation, Mr. Tilson, M.P, placed a wreath on behalf of the House of Commons at the Menin Gate Memorial to the Missing^[1], alongside of other international dignitaries. The delegation then travelled to the site of the Canadian monument commemorating the victory of Canadian soldiers in the battle of Passchendaele in 1917, where they also placed a wreath.^[2]

During the course of some of its meetings, the delegation was joined by H.E. Ross Hornby, Ambassador of Canada to the European Union (EU), other officials from Canada’s Mission to the EU, Maria José Sousa Fialho, Special Advisor Transatlantic Relations for the European Parliament, and by Mr. Christos Sirros, Delegate General of Québec to the EU.

In preparation for the meetings in Brussels, members of the Association met in Ottawa with Ignacio Sanchez de Lerin Garcia-Ovies, Deputy Head of Mission of the Embassy of Spain in Canada, who briefed the delegation on the priorities of the Spanish Presidency of the EU, beginning in January 2010.^[3] Delegates also received a very good briefing from officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT).

 

PROGRAM AND SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS

1.    Briefing by H.E. Ross Hornby, Ambassador of Canada to the European Union, and Canadian Officials

Ambassador Hornby welcomed the delegation and opened the briefing with a discussion on the implications of the Treaty of Lisbon, a reform treaty that will bring about significant changes to institutions of the European Union (EU). The Treaty achieved full ratification in November 2009. The Ambassador articulated that the Treaty of Lisbon would result in enhanced powers for the European Parliament (EP), including co-decision making with the Council of the European Union in many policy areas, including budgetary measures.  The strengthened role of the European Parliament meant that parliamentary affairs, including inter-parliamentary meetings, would increase in importance as a result. Ambassador Hornby further noted that the new powers held by the EP posed certain challenges to the work of Canada’s Mission, as it resulted in a diffusion of power within the EU and the need to engage with an increasing number of players, including the 736 Members of the EP^[4].

The briefing then turned to an overview of key issues in Canada-EU relations. Officials indicated that the first round of negotiations for the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the European Union were held in October 2009. The first round of negotiations was largely successful with 60% of the draft text having been agreed upon, but with difficult issues including: agriculture, government procurement and intellectual property, remaining bracketed during negotiations.

Next, officials provided delegates with an overview of the Czech visa situation. In July, 2009, the Government of Canada imposed visa restrictions on citizens of the Czech Republic. On 19 October, 2009, the European Commission issued a special report stating that if progress on this issue was not demonstrated by December 2009, the European Commission may recommend the imposition of visas on Canadian diplomats and officials. Mission officials indicated that a Canada-Czech working group had been established to address both sides of the issue, including the generosity of the Canadian refugee system and the push factors, such as the position of minorities in the Czech Republic. Officials were of the view that as long as some progress had been made in discussions, visa restrictions would not be imposed on Canadian officials and diplomats in December.

Finally, the briefing concluded with issues relating to the Arctic and climate change, including the United Nations Conference on Climate Change taking place in Copenhagen in December, 2009. Officials indicated that though the European Union was pressuring Canada to agree to binding Green House Gas (GHG) emission reduction targets as part of a global agreement on climate change, it recognized Canada’s position as being unable to move forward without action on the part of the United States. The Ambassador further noted that oil sands were expected to become an important issue, as some Members of the European Parliament are currently contemplating a resolution that would prevent European companies from investing in oil sands, or importing oil originating from oil sands.^[5] With respect to the Arctic, officials commented on the European Parliament’s 2008 resolution calling for an international treaty on the Arctic, indicating that Canada did not believe that a new international governance system was necessary for the region.

 

2.    First Working Meeting with the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Canada (DRC): Canada-EU Relations, Canada-Europe Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, the Northern Dimension and the Financial Crisis

The meeting opened with introductory remarks by Philip Bradbourn, Chair of the Delegation for Relations with Canada and David Tilson, M.P, President of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association, who both noted the long-standing excellent relationship between Canada and the European Union, as well as the many areas of mutual interest and cooperation.

After an overview of Canada-EU relations made by representatives from European Commission and Council, the first major topic of discussion was the Canada-Europe Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CETA). Mr. Mauro Petriccione, Director of the European Commission’s Directorate General for Trade, began by providing an outline of past difficulties faced by Canada and the EU in moving towards a deeper economic partnership. Though most traditional trade barriers between the two partners had already been eliminated, jurisdictional issues had prevented Canada from committing to greater economic integration. However, CETA presented a unique opportunity, as the provinces had agreed to participate in and support CETA negotiations. CETA was also seen as unique, as all sectors were on the negotiating table, including agriculture.

Christofer Fjellner, Swedish Member of the European Parliament (MEP), then presented his views on the trade negotiations, emphasizing the need to overcome traditional areas of difficulties including: dairy, agriculture, poultry and government procurement. In his view, labour mobility, including the common recognition of professional qualifications, represented a key area where CETA could strengthen ties with Canada.

Canadian delegates emphasized the importance of the CETA negotiations to Canada, including the commitment on the part of the provinces to the agreement. They further articulated the need to work together on bilateral issues that could affect the trade negotiations, including the EU’s 2009 ban on the import of seal products and the Czech visa issue.

The next topic on the agenda was the European Union’s Northern Dimension (ND), a policy that establishes a common framework for the promotion of dialogue and concrete cooperation in terms of economic integration, competitiveness and sustainable development in Northern Europe.^[6] Canada has observer status in the ND and actively participates in its nuclear waste disposal program in the Russian Kola Peninsula, as well as the ND Partnership on Health and Social Well-being of the people living in the Arctic.^[7]

MEP Diane Wallis, Vice-President of the European Parliament with joint responsibility for the Northern Dimension, presented her views on the evolution of the EU’s Arctic Policy. She articulated that the EU needed to develop a separate Arctic policy both to give the Northern Dimension its own budget, as well as to mainstream Arctic issues throughout all of the EU’s policy areas, including shipping, fisheries and foreign policy. With respect to the European Commission’s 2008 Communication on the Arctic^[8], which recommended that the EU become a member of the Arctic Council, Ms. Wallis advocated that EU membership in the Arctic Council would provide Canada and the EU with another to avenue in which to work towards solutions on Arctic related issues such as the seal hunt.

Canadian delegates explained the main dimensions of the Government of Canada’s Canada’s Northern Strategy: Our North, Our Heritage, Our Future.^[9] They emphasized that an important part of this strategy was reinforcing Canada’s sovereignty over its northern territory, as well as promoting dialogue with bilateral partners on Arctic issues and strengthening the role multilateral institutions such as the Arctic Council. Delegates further articulated that Canada was working with Arctic Council states to clarify the criteria for permanent observer status by non-Arctic states and others at the Arctic Council.

The last topic on the agenda for the day was the financial crisis, which was presented by MEPs Wolf Klinz and Peter Skinner. In Wolf Klinz’s view, the financial crisis could be attributed to political failure, a lack of oversight over financial institutions, and the consumer demand of average citizens. He further outlined the significant toll that the crisis was continuing to have on EU Member States, including high levels of unemployment, as well as 20 EU Member States being currently unable to meet the 3% deficit criteria outlined in the Maastricht Treaty, which was a necessary precursor for the European Community’s economic and monetary union.^[10] While EU Member States were pursuing different types of stimulus measures, Klinz noted that their long term costs remained unknown. MEP Peter Skinner added that the European Union and the United States needed to work together to establish stronger global regulations and oversight of financial institutions.

Canadian delegates articulated that the country’s sound banking system with a rigorous regulatory regime had helped mitigate the impact of the financial crisis on Canadians. In addition, they noted that the Canadian housing finance market did not have a large sub-prime component and therefore had not witnessed the proliferation of products and marketing practices that had led to problems in other countries.  Canadian delegates also welcomed the EU taking a leadership role in pushing for stronger financial regulations internationally. They further stressed that this was not the time for protectionism in international trade.

 

3.    Second Working Meeting with the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Canada (DRC): Transatlantic Relations, Security and Foreign Policy, and Implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon

Niki Tazavela, MEP and Vice-Chairwoman of the European Parliament’s delegation for relations with the United States (D-US), opened the discussion on transatlantic relations. Niki Tazavela articulated that the main challenge in transatlantic relations was a lack mutual knowledge, including confusion in North America regarding institutional developments within the European Union. She further noted that this situation would be addressed through changes brought about by the Treaty of Lisbon, including the new positions of President of the European Union and the High Representative for Foreign Policy and Security, which would provide third countries “with a person to call”.^[11] Niki Tazavela also suggested that communication could further be improved by the Canadian Parliament opening an office in Brussels to liaise with the European Parliament.

MEP Elmar Brok, Chairman the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with the United States, then outlined some of the challenges in the EU-United States relationship, including the weakened state of the US economy, divisions over strategy in Afghanistan, and American unilateralism.^[12] However, Elmar Brok noted that shifts in US foreign policy as result of the election of President Obama, as well as the impact of the financial crisis on the American economy, have also presented an opportunity for the United States and the European Union to work together to reform the international financial system. Elmar Brok further saw the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) as an opportunity to work towards establishing a common transatlantic economic area, including Canada, the EU and the United States.

Canadian delegates articulated that Canada continues to be committed to working through multilateral institutions as a means of engaging and promoting dialogue on issues of importance in the transatlantic relationship, including economic relations and security. They further raised the point that negative perceptions of the United States were pervasive in Europe, without an adequate recognition of the strategic importance of continued US engagement in European security.

The discussion then turned to Afghanistan, a topic presented by MEPs Arnaud Danjean and Pino Arlacchi. They articulated that European Union’s approach to Afghanistan should shift away from combating terrorism towards addressing corruption and opium production in the country. From the perspective of the European Parliament, opium production and its relationship to organized crime represented the greatest security threat to Europe. The presenters further expressed their support of Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister of the United

Kingdom for openly acknowledging corruption in Afghanistan, as manifested in the country’s presidential and provincial elections in August, 2009.^[13] In the view of the presenters, corruption was the main reason for the lack of tangible success in Afghanistan, as international development aid to the country often ended up in the hands of corrupt officials.

Canadian delegates stated that Afghanistan represented a key foreign policy priority for Canada. They further articulated the need to recognize the significant progress that had been achieved in the country as a result of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, whose aim is to provide peace and security to the region to enable sustainable reconstruction and development and good government.^[14] Canadian delegates also questioned the European Parliament’s approach of separating narcotic production from terrorism. They in turn suggested that opium production and terrorism were intrinsically linked as security threats originating from the country.

Finally, the discussion concluded with a presentation by MEP Georgios Papstamkos on the implications of the Treaty of Lisbon. The presentation focused on how the Treaty of Lisbon would expand the role of the European Parliament in commercial affairs, including trade agreements with third countries. Though the European Commission was responsible for negotiating trade agreements on behalf of the European Union, it would have to keep the European Parliament informed on ongoing trade agreements. In addition, the European Parliament would be responsible for ratifying trade agreements, but would be unable to propose any amendments.

Canadian delegates suggested that the enhanced role of the European Parliament (EP) in the decision making process, coupled with CETA negotiations, provided impetus for strengthening parliamentary ties between Canada and the EP. They also asked how the Treaty of Lisbon would affect the many areas in which Canada and the EU currently cooperate, including: justice and home affairs, transport, customs cooperation, science and technology, education, and fisheries.^[15] MEPs responded that justice and home affairs, including data protection, could be areas in which the European Parliament and Canadian Parliamentarians could pursue further cooperation as a result of reforms brought about by the Treaty of Lisbon.

 

4.    3^rd Working Meeting with the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Canada (DRC): Climate Change, Environment, Energy and Agriculture

The 3^rd working meeting began with MEPs Claude Turmes and Giles Chichester presenting their views on climate change and energy security. They articulated that EU Member States’ dependence on external sources for its energy supplies, such as Russia for natural gas, had led the EU to focus on the development of renewable energy sources, including wind power. EU Member States were also pursuing energy efficiency initiatives such as the retrofit of older buildings. With regards to the 2009 UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, MEPs expressed their disappointment that the Government of Canada was no longer committed to implementing the Kyoto Protocol, which calls for slightly above 5% reductions in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions from 1990 GHG emission levels by 2012.^[16] They further pointed to GHG emission from oil sands^[17], as the main reason Canada could not pursue more aggressive GHG reduction targets.

Canadian delegates then presented their differing views on climate change. David Tilson, M.P, articulated the Government of Canada was committed to working with the European Union to pursue a 50% reduction in GHG emission levels by 2050, as part of a global climate change agreement.^[18] From the Government’s point of view, further reductions in emission levels were not possible unless emerging economies, such as China and India, were onboard, as well as the United States. He also stated that the Government of Canada was committed to reducing GHG emissions by 20% from 2006 levels by 2020.^[19]

Paule Brunelle, M.P and representative of the Bloc Québécois, then presented her party’s position on climate change. She indicated that the Province of Quebec had its own plan to reduce GHG emissions by 6% below 1990 levels, which included initiatives that focused on the “pollutant as payer”. She also noted that since the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, Canada had experienced a 26.2% increase in GHG emissions, mainly resulting from oil sand production in other provinces. Mme. Brunelle concluded by welcoming the European Union’s help in motivating Canada to pursue more aggressive reductions in GHG emissions.

The next topic of discussion was agriculture, which focussed on food labelling, the EU’s Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) and Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). MEP Renate Sommer outlined the key elements of proposed legislation in the European Parliament on food labelling. Currently, food labelling in the EU remains optional. The new proposal suggests that packaged food should carry labels with caloric and nutritional information, along with a colour scheme that evaluates the nutritional value of packaged food. Current EP debates focused on the language of the labels reflecting the country where the food product was produced.

Canadian delegates outlined the main features of Canada’s food labelling system in the Government of Canada’s 2003 Guide to Food Labelling and Advertising, emphasizing that the main focus of the country’s system was to maintain truth and integrity in consumer communications.  Delegates indicated that all mandatory information on food labels must be made available in Canada’s both official languages: French and English.

MEP James Nicholson then provided the Canadian delegation with an overview of key changes in the EU’s Common Agriculture Policy (CAP)^[20], including reforms that shifted the focus of the policy from direct agriculture subsidies towards income support for farmers and rural development. He further noted that the program, which represents approximately 40% of the EU’s budget, remains controversial and is likely to undergo substantive changes with the establishment of a new European Commission in 2014.

Canadian delegates articulated that they saw CAP reform measures as a step in the right direction. However, they further stated that CAP remained a trade concern for Canada, as high subsidies for EU farmers continues to create trade distortions, which are considered detrimental to Canada’s agriculture and agri-food sector.

Finally, MEP Maria do Ceu Patrao Neves provided an overview of recent initiatives to reform the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), an EU policy instrument that deals with the management of fisheries and aquaculture on behalf of EU Member States.^[21] In 2008, the European Commission launched a review of the policy, which aims to address overfishing, investment in new capital, as well as ensuring that the industry is financially sustainable for fishermen. Canadian delegates responded by welcoming reforms to the CFP, in particular its focus on sustainable development of the fishing industry in Europe.

MEP Philip Bradbourn, Chair of the Delegation for Relations with Canada, then closed the final working session of the 32^nd Annual Inter-parliamentary Meeting by announcing that the DRC would visit Canada in 2010 as part of the next annual Inter-parliamentary Meeting.

 

5.    Meeting with Dr. Marek Grela, Director of the Council of the European Union Secretariat’s Directorate for America, United Nations, Human Rights and Counterterrorism and Rory Domm from Council of the European Union’s  Transatlantic Relations Unit: Implications of the Treaty of Lisbon

After outlining the historical development of the European Union (EU), Dr. Grela provided the delegation with an explanation of the implications of the Treaty of Lisbon. Dr. Grela articulated that the institutional changes brought about by the Treaty were aimed at providing the European Council^[22] with more strategic guidance. In particular, the new position of President of the European Union, which would chair the European Council during his or her two and a half year term, was established to provide the Council will a long term strategic agenda and continuous leadership. The current system of rotating presidencies had meant that in the past there was a lack of continuity in planning among EU Member States. However, Dr. Grela noted that the system of rotating Presidencies would remain for chairing meetings of the Council of the European Union.^[23] Meanwhile, the new position of High Representative for Foreign Policy and Security, which would be responsible for chairing the Council of the European Union’s General Affairs and External Relations Council meetings, would bring better coordination among EU Member States in the area of foreign policy.

Finally, greater involvement of both the European Parliament and national parliaments as a result of the Lisbon Treaty seeks to bring more democratic legitimacy to the European Union. The EP, the only democratically elected institution of the EU, would now have co-decision making power with the Council of the European Union in most policy areas. Moreover, the Treaty of Lisbon also granted national parliaments of EU Member States greater oversight over EU legislation, including the ability to halt legislation. However, Dr. Grela explained that this would only occur, if a national parliament was able to establish a coalition of national parliaments opposed to the proposed EU legislation.

Canadian delegates then raised questions regarding how these changes would affect the EU’s relations with third countries, including Canada. Specifically, delegates were interested in which EU institutions they should work with to advance Canadian interests on different issues. They also asked about potential challenges to the implementation of the Treaty. Dr. Gréla responded that the Treaty could take up to five years to implement, as EU institutions and Member States continue negotiate the configurations of the new positions and powers of the respective EU institutions.   Maria José Sousa Fialho, Special Advisor Transatlantic Relations for the European Parliament, who attended the meeting, articulated that the European Parliament would serve as an interlocutor between the Commission and the European Council due to the Treaty of Lisbon, and as such would be a good forum for Canadian Parliamentarians to advance their interests.

 

6.    Meeting with Professor Sven Biscop, Director of Security and Global Governance, Egmont-The Royal Institute for International Relations: The European Union and Security Issues

The Canadian Delegation had the opportunity to meet with Dr. Sven Biscop from Edgmont, the Royal Institute for International Relations, an independent think tank that conducts research in European affairs, security policy and Central Africa.^[24] A specialist in the European Security Strategy^[25], Dr. Biscop provided delegation members with his views on what the EU should focus on in the context of its Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). Dr. Biscop articulated that the European Union (EU) should play a more active role in contributing to the development of a new strategic concept for NATO, set to take place in 2010. He then suggested that the EU should review the policy objectives of the European Neighbourhood Policy to determine whether the overall aims of the policy are in line with its strategic interests. For example, the European Neighbourhood Policy^[26], a policy in which the EU seeks develop deeper political and economic integration with its border states, may not be the most effective means of addressing terrorism in states such as Morocco. Similarly, Dr. Biscop also suggested that the EU evaluate its strategic partnerships with third countries, such as Canada, to evaluate common priorities and identify areas in which the EU and third countries could pursue joint action. Finally, according to Dr. Biscop, there is a need to thoroughly evaluate the success and failures of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP)^[27]. While many missions had been quite successful to date, the ESDP lacked an overall strategic vision linking the outcomes of its mission to the priorities of the European Union.

Canadian delegates then focussed the discussion on the relationship between NATO and the ESDP.  Dr. Biscop articulated that the creation of the ESDP marked an attempt by the European Union to address its own security needs, as well as establish the EU as a viable partner with the United States in international security. In his view, the ESDP would not replace NATO, but rather served as means of shifting some of the international peacekeeping burden from NATO.

 

7.    Briefing and Discussion with Mrs. Cecilia Yuste, Councillor for Transatlantic Relations and Mrs. Cristina Gomariz Pamblanco, Deputy Councillor, Permanent Mission of Spain to the European Union: Priorities of the Spanish Presidency 

The Canadian delegation met with officials from the Permanent Mission of Spain to the European Union to learn about Spain’s priorities for its upcoming Presidency of the European Union, beginning in January 2010. Officials indicated that the Spanish Presidency would be considered a transitional presidency tasked with implementing changes brought about by the Treaty of Lisbon, which would require a great degree of flexibility, collaboration and teamwork. The discussion then turned to the 2010 Summit between Canada and the EU, which would take place under the Spanish Presidency. Officials identified international cooperation in Haiti, Africa, and Latin America as possible areas of focus for the Summit, as well as crisis management. Spanish officials further indicated that the Spanish Presidency would work hard to maintain the current impetus behind negotiations towards the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA).

Canadian delegates inquired into the other priorities of the Spanish Presidency, including their focus on social and gender issues within the European Union, as well as international development. Delegates were further raised the possibility of enhancing Canada-EU cooperation in the area of culture, as well as joint cooperation in promoting dialogue between North America, Europe and the Muslim world, as another means of addressing terrorism.

 

CONCLUSION

During its visit to Brussels, the Canadian delegation held meetings with the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Canada, senior Members of the EP, officials from the Canadian Mission to the EU, and with senior officials from the Council of the EU. These meetings provided Canadian parliamentarians with an opportunity to advance Canadian interests within the European Union. Canadian parliamentarians gained further insight into policy debates in Europe, as well as institutional developments brought about by the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon, which took place in November 2009. The meetings further highlighted the increasing importance of an on-going inter-parliamentary dialogue between the Parliament of Canada and the European Parliament (EP), given that the EP is gaining decision making power in a broad range of policy areas in which Canada and the EU cooperate, as a result of the Treaty of Lisbon, including: agriculture and fisheries policies; visas, asylum and immigration and integration; judicial cooperation in criminal matters; energy; border checks; public health; and tourism.^[28] Finally, the launch of negotiations towards a Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement further reinforces the need for enhanced parliamentary ties between Canada and the EU. The Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association looks forward to hosting the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Canada, when it travels to Canada in 2010. This next meeting will provide a further opportunity to strengthen this increasingly important relationship.

 

Respectfully submitted,