'Not the end of the world'

Photo: The Canadian Press

Canada's chief negotiator for the original NAFTA says it would not be the end of the world if the agreement disappeared, suggesting it might be a better outcome than letting the Trump administration rewrite the rules of international trade.

John Weekes told a panel discussion this week that he hopes Canada remains at the negotiating table until the very end and that if talks ultimately break off blame should lie squarely with the Trump administration.

He says the new American administration is trying to distort the purpose of the trade agreement with its proposals: a five-year termination clause, a gutting of the oversight mechanisms and extremely aggressive demands on autos, dairy and Buy American.

The 1990s negotiator says parts of the talks are proceeding nicely, in areas that deal with new, modern chapters. It's the part involving the renegotiated portions that is off to an extremely poor start, he told a panel organized by the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations.

"They're all very problematic," Weekes said of the proposals. "It's the renegotiation where the negotiations are in real trouble. And I think that the proposals from the United States that I've read about... seem to me to be so extreme that one really has to ask the question whether President Trump wants to have a NAFTA or is looking for an excuse to get out of it.

"I think it's very clear from a Canadian point of view that Canadians are going to look at these negotiations from the point of view of, 'Is the outcome better than what we went in with, or worse?' And, you know, the NAFTA's been a very valuable agreement. But it wouldn’t be the end of the world if it disappeared."

He said ending NAFTA might be temporary — maybe a future U.S. administration would re-join. But he suggested that might be better than tailoring a trade deal to Donald Trump's preferences. So waiting out the Trump era might be a better choice.