Stephen Harper's NAFTA memo shows he 'has a grudge to bear,' says Liberal MP
The Liberal government is dismissing former prime minister Stephen Harper's "Napping on NAFTA" memo as nothing more than mud-slinging from a man with a grudge.
The memo was obtained by The Canadian Press and it criticizes Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government for too quickly rejecting U.S. proposals, insisting on negotiating alongside Mexico and promoting progressive priorities like labour, gender, Indigenous and environmental issues.
But Bob Nault, a Liberal MP and the chair of the standing committee on foreign affairs, spent last week running from meeting to meeting in Mexico and Washington — and he insists it was no slumber party.
Nault spoke with As It Happens host Carol Off about Harper's memo. Here is part of their conversation.
Stephen Harper says the Liberals are asleep at the switch when it comes to the NAFTA talks. How do you respond?
I'm a bit surprised that Stephen Harper, who's the ex-leader of the government of Canada, obviously retired, defeated, would come out in a fashion that would, in some respects, damage our abilities to negotiate.
But aside from that, is he right or wrong?
I think he's wrong. The government of Canada has put a very solid position forward at NAFTA. The real issue for us is the other side has a particular different strategy than we have.
He says that Canada has been too quick to reject U.S. proposals, to look seriously at what the United States is offering ... and we're not looking at this seriously. Is there some truth to that?
No, there's no truth to that because, frankly, if you want to roll back the clock as it relates to free trade then, sure, you could look at those particular offers made by the president and his team. But it's pretty clear when you speak to people in Washington that their strategy, [U.S. President Donald] Trump's and his team, is to find a way to get Mexico or Canada to walk away from the negotiations.
As he said to some legislators that we've been made privy to, the strategy is basically to put this in a six-month high cooker type of negotiation, and so if you put poison pills or issues that are not anywhere near something Canada could accept, then that might drive the agenda towards the negotiation that he thinks is the best approach for him as a negotiator.
If that's what's happening, if that's what you're hearing, then there must be some truth to what Stephen Harper is saying — that these talks are in real trouble.
These talks are going to be difficult and these talks are going to be long and drawn out.
The objective of the exercise for [Foreign Affairs Minister] Chrystia Freeland and the government is to stay at the table and work hard with not only the negotiators, but Congress and the representatives who have a big say in whether NAFTA is renewed.
The fact that Mr. Harper's out there making these public comments is going to affect us at the negotiating table because the next time we meet, the American side will say, "Well, even the previous prime minister of Canada thinks that you guys should be a little more flexible and a little more willing to give things up."
Why stand behind Mexico?
I think it's a little early in the process to be making a decision about striking out on your own when this is a tri-part negotiation, has been since the '90s, and Mexico is our partner, as is the U.S.
I think that's foolhardy, premature and really suggests that somehow Stephen Harper's either really missing the point of what we're here for, or he's putting forward suggestions that sound like he has a grudge to bear based on the last election.
Perhaps what Mr. Harper is doing, wittingly or not, is starting the debate in this country about whether we want NAFTA, what we're willing to give up in order to have an agreement with the United States and Mexico. Is this not a time and place to be having that discussion?
I don't think Stephen Harper's trying to start a debate about whether we should be in free trade agreements or not. I think he's got a grudge to hold and he's more interested in putting stuff out there that is going to do damage to our negotiating positions.
Do you think he would really try and do serious damage to this trade agreement because he just wants to get back at the Liberals?
What else could it be?
He knew this memo would get leaked that he put out, so he can't possibly have thought that anything else but what we're talking about today would have happened.
- Free trade with China won't hurt Canada-U.S. relationship: PM
- NAFTA's demise just one potential trigger for a market crash
This interview has been edited for length and clarity. For more, listen to our conversation with Bob Nault.