Boosting Canadian trade vs. free-trade deals

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support for as little as $5 per month!

As soon as it won its coveted majority, the Harper government put the pedal to the metal on the trade front, with a stampede of new free-trade deals. The Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade currently lists 18 different deals in play, ranging from puny (Panama and Jordan) to gargantuan (Europe, Japan and India).

Anyone who stands in the way of this juggernaut clearly must oppose trade in general. At least that's how the Conservatives portray the issue, attempting to brand its New Democratic opponents as economically illiterate dinosaurs.

There's a big difference, however, between signing free-trade pacts and actually doing something about trade. Canada's trade performance deteriorated badly over the past decade. The quantity of goods and services shipped abroad is seven percentage points lower than when the Harper government took office, lower even than back in 2000. And what we do export increasingly consists of raw resources (especially oil). Our once-impressive trade surplus has melted into deficit. Despite accelerating petroleum sales, we're running up international red ink at the rate of 3 per cent of GDP per year.

Free-trade deals already cover 70 per cent of Canada's trade -- yet the more pacts we've inked, the worse our performance has become. I've reviewed our five longest-standing trade pacts: with the United States, Mexico, Israel, Chile and Costa Rica. Canada's exports to them grew more slowly than our exports to non-free-trade partners, while our imports surged much faster than with the rest of the world. If the policy goal (sensibly) is to boost exports and strengthen the trade balance, then signing free-trade deals is exactly the wrong thing to do.

Indeed, it could be argued that it's the current government, not free-trade critics, that is "anti-trade." For example, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade employs hundreds of bureaucrats who travel the world negotiating trade deals. But the department plans to axe 53 commerce officers who actually work with Canadian businesses to boost exports. Meanwhile, CBC reports that four Canadian consulates and trade offices in the United States (by far our most important export market) will be closed.

Ottawa trumpets its latest free-trade pact (with Honduras) as evidence of a commitment to trade. Honduras is an impoverished quasi-dictatorship where journalists are routinely assassinated. Canada sells less than $50-million a year there (while importing four times as much). We export more to the United States in 88 minutes than to Honduras in a year -- yet as we ink this blockbuster deal with Honduras, we close trade offices in the United States. What's the net impact on trade? Clearly negative.

Ottawa's endorsement of an overvalued currency (trading 25 per cent above purchasing power parity) also hurts Canada's exports, forcing economic activity into lower-productivity non-tradable sectors of the economy. Even the plan to ram through new bitumen pipelines, seemingly all about exports, may undermine our overall trade performance. We won't refine the stuff here, and we won't make the mining machinery here, so our capacity to produce higher-end products (including for world markets) will further diminish.

Ultimately, the proof is in the pudding. Total exports of goods and services were equivalent to 31 per cent of Canada's GDP last year -- down from 38 per cent when the Harper government was elected (and 46 per cent in 2000). If the goal is truly boosting trade (as opposed to enshrining business-friendly economic rules or propping up authoritarian governments in Latin America), then this government is failing miserably.

Canada's export failure cannot be blamed on foreign trade barriers. Instead, we must look in the mirror -- at the structural inadequacy of our business sector. Canada has chronically failed to nurture and develop domestically based globally active firms that produce innovative, high-value products for world markets. Working to fix that problem (through proactive technology, innovation and sector-development strategies) would do more for our actual trade than all the free-trade talks in the world. If you truly believe in trade, don't be distracted by the trade deals.

Jim Stanford is an economist with the Canadian Auto Workers union. This article was first published in the Globe and Mail.

Cultivate Canada's media. Support Become a member.

Related Items

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable. has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.