August 4, 2004 No. 87 International Trade Minister Jim Peterson today announced the winners of the NAFTA@10 multimedia essay competition for Canadian students, Canada’s Experience with NAFTA. Contestants were invited to submit an essay that reflects the impact and role of NAFTA in the economies of all three member countries. The competition was designed to encourage a lively, informed dialogue on the impact and role of trade liberalization in North America. Canada’s Experience with NAFTA was administered by the Canadian Bureau for International Education and was launched in October 2003 as part of the 10th anniversary of NAFTA. “These young people have a firm grasp of the important link between international trade and investment and their standard of living,” said International Trade Minister Jim Peterson. “The quality of their work is truly impressive.” The $5,000 First Prize was awarded to Elizabeth Cobbett of Concordia University for her essay “Deeper North American Integration? Putting the Horse Back Before the Cart.” Francis Bedros of Carleton University won the $1000 Second Prize for his essay “Harmonization of Environmental Standards and Convergence of Environmental Policy in Canada: the NAFTA Context.” Third Prize, also worth $1000, was presented to Irène Artru of Laval University for her essay “Controlling the Environmental and Social Impacts of NAFTA: Successes and Missteps in Implementing the Side Agreements.” Honourable Mentions were also awarded to Szandra Bereczky for her essay “NAFTA Chapter 10: Enhancing Trust in the Canadian Business Community;” Hanako Saito for “Wage Inequality and Trade Preferences in Mexico after NAFTA;” and Rafael Pacquing for “The Influence of Chapter 11 on the Recent Australia-U.S. Free Trade Agreement.” The full texts of the winning essays, as well as of those that received an Honourable Mention, can be found at http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/nafta-alena/celeb2-en.asp. All views expressed in the papers are solely those of the authors and do not represent the views of the Government of Canada. - 30 - Excerpts from the winning essays are attached. For further information, media representatives may contact: Jacqueline LaRocque Director of Communications Office of the Minister of International Trade (613) 992-7332 Media Relations Office Foreign Affairs Canada and International Trade Canada (613) 995-1874 http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca EXCERPTS FROM WINNING ESSAYS ON CANADA’S EXPERIENCE WITH NAFTA Elizabeth Cobbett, First Prize “More specifically, it has been suggested that a sectoral customs union would be the preferred variant of a customs union because it has the merit of simultaneously promoting further economic integration through converging sectors, and leaving more difficult and contentious sectors to be dealt with later. The flexibility of a sectoral customs union would also have the added advantage of permitting the inclusion of Mexico in a trilateral agreement in certain sectors.” Francis Bedros, Second Prize “What is basically to be drawn from NAFTA is that its mandate is to define not what a country’s environmental policy should be, but rather how the objectives of environmental policy should be achieved. Quite clearly, they are to be achieved in a way that restricts trade between the partner states as little as possible.” “Finally, it could well be that the liberalization of trade, that stimulus to economic growth which is so feared by the environmental groups, will in the long run promote protection of the environment. For the higher the per capita income, the more resources the government is able to allocate to environmental monitoring. In the long run, it seems that economic growth, once it attains a degree of development that is difficult to define (although necessarily high), contributes to the improvement of environmental standards.” Irène Artru, Third Prize “Ten years after their initial implementation, have they performed up to expectations? Has the full potential of the mechanisms provided for by the two treaties in fact been realized?” “Perhaps the contrasting results of the two agreements are not entirely due to whether appropriate resources are allocated to the respective sector of intervention. It is possible that the lengthy debate on the social clause is affecting implementation of the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation and in some way obstructing the full realization of its potential, while on the other hand the notion of international environmental cooperation is much more widespread, and indeed making rapid progress.” Szandra Bereczky, Honourable Mention “NAFTA is a model free trade agreement in the realm of government procurement. Its Chapter 10 provides sufficient legislative guidance to foster commitment and engagement from all three member states. This commitment helps to minimize corruption and to break down excessively nationally focused procurement policies.“ Hanako Saito, Honourable Mention “Since income inequality depends upon the effects of technological change, foreign direct investment and institutional changes in the country, strong demand for skilled workers seems to represent the future trend. Without appropriate investment in higher education from the private sector and the government, income inequality will continue to rise in Mexico and many other countries in Latin America.” Rafael Pacquing, Honourable Mention “Every FTA [free trade agreement] is a compromise between the negotiating governments and their domestic constituencies. Furthermore, extraneous political events and sentiments can have unforeseen consequences on the negotiating process. It is therefore unlikely that an FTA will completely satisfy the demands of every political constituency, even those of its supporters. It is also unlikely that an ideal FTA from a commercial or economic perspective will emerge anywhere. The more complex FTA negotiations are, the greater the likelihood that the final product will have imperfections. The AUSFTA [Australia-U.S. Free Trade Agreement] and NAFTA are not exceptions.” “NAFTA Chapter 11 represents one of the most developed regimes for the treatment of investment in an FTA. The Australian policy community recognized this and considered what Chapter 11 could do for them if they were to have similar provisions in the AUSFTA. Even though NAFTA Chapter 11 was ultimately not adopted by the Australians, for the foreseeable future it will remain the standard for other agreements to follow and will continue to provide guidance to other countries entering into FTAs of their own.”
