SANTIAGO, Chile — Canadian Trade Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne doubled down Tuesday in his country's pursuit of a “progressive trade agenda” in the face of headwinds against globalism and continued economic integration.

Speaking at a gathering here of the Canadian-Chile Chamber of Commerce, hours before he joins representatives from 14 other Asian-Pacific nations in a coastal town about 75 miles west, Champagne said Canada's trade policy needs to focus on the rights of women and indigenous people, opportunities for youth and growth for small- and medium-sized businesses.

“Why don’t we start putting people at the center of what we’re doing and perhaps we will be more successful?” he said to the crowd of business executives.

After the event, Champagne sat down with POLITICO to answer questions about the meeting in Vina del Mar, the future of NAFTA and Canada’s relationship with China in a new era of global trade.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

I’m interested in the future of TPP. Does Canada have a plan for preserving the gains and sacrifices that were made in that deal? Is that going to be in a message you will be giving other countries?

The message I will be giving is obviously that Canada is coming to the table with a positive and constructive approach. I had the chance to speak to a number of my counterparts around the world which will be present this evening and tomorrow. Canada wants to be a leader when it comes to progressive trade. I’ve said the Asia-Pacific region is a key region for Canada.

Prime Minister [Justin] Trudeau singled out China, Japan and India. So we’re going to be there at the table positively and constructively. Because I think we owe it … to Canadian workers, the Canadian people to ensure we engage proactively. Canada wants to be front and center in these discussions and that’s what we’re going to be doing.

Is there a sense that the 11 TPP countries minus the U.S. can move on and form a TPP bloc without the U.S.?

We’ll see. I cannot prejudge the discussions which are going to be taking place tonight and tomorrow. But what I can say is we’re coming there with an open, constructive, positive message that we believe in open trade and a rules-based system. That we believe in a progressive trade agenda. That’s what we’re going to be putting on the table to our colleagues and making the case for trade. Trade means more growth and growth means more jobs. For me, trade is part of the growth agenda that we have.

Is there a balancing act that has to be done to avoid antagonizing the U.S. in NAFTA renegotiations and still maintain relationships, possibly through a TPP agreement?

Canada is a trading nation. We are 0.5 percent of the world population and represent about 2.2-2.3 percent of world trade. So for us, opening up markets, promoting a rules-based trading system and a progressive agenda, that’s what we did with the European Union. … What Canada is showing the world now is a very strong voice for open, rules-based trade and this is a message, I can assure you, which is resonating. I’ve been on the road 29 days now and the message of Canada about progressive, open trade is resonating everywhere. So people will listen to Canada tomorrow.

In terms of NAFTA, can you list the top three demands of Canada? Is there a consultation process that’s now begun in Canada?

Formal notification from the U.S. administration to the Congress has not been done. So there is a procedural step that needs to be taken. However, NAFTA has been amended, I think, 11 times already since it was put in place two decades ago, and therefore a number of things did not exist at the time. Let me give you an example: E-commerce, which people are talking about very much, whether at the WTO or other forum, did not exist. Those are the types of things you start looking at on an agreement that was done two decades ago. When you sit down and look at what are the types of things that we could be looking at, this is just one thing that’s been talked about in many different circles.

My colleague, Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland, has the lead on negotiations with the U.S., but the comments of President [Donald] Trump for me were an acknowledgment of the breadth and depth of our relationship, which is based on security and prosperity. We have $2.4 billion in trade every day, 400,000 people who cross the border every day. Thirty-five U.S. states have Canada as their primary export market. You go up to 48 states which have Canada as either their primary, secondary or tertiary market. You have 9 million jobs that depend on trade between Canada and the U.S. And we are the largest customer to the U.S. but also the largest supplier of oil, gas and electricity. So you sit across the table from a very stable and strong position because, not only do we sell to each other, but we make things together. I think [Trump’s] latest comments were an acknowledgment that this trading relationship has provided on the U.S. and Canadian sides millions of good, well-paying middle class jobs. If you put people at the center of your action you realize this is a trading relationship that has been helping the middle class.

The U.S. has an agenda with Mexico that is different from Canada. Is there a fear that these supply chains will be disrupted and this deal, which has been a trilateral deal for so long, will be unraveled into two separate deals? What’s Canada’s stance on that?

We always say NAFTA is a three-nation agreement and it should be negotiated on a trilateral basis. So clearly I think there needs to be a recognition of what trade has been doing and what trade has meant in the North American context in terms of jobs for the middle class and growth in our relationship. As you said, a lot of our supply chains are integrated. Some of the consumer goods cross the border five or six times before they end up in the shops. The way I interpret the comments that were made [by Trump] was an acknowledgment of the breadth and depth of that relationship. President Trump used the word "tweaking." We are prepared as Canada to sit down at the table.

During TPP negotiations it seemed that things were bifurcated between China and the U.S. Is it a more blurry world now with China’s engagement, and do you expect there to be some kind of TPP with China involved but maybe with a downgrade to the standards that were negotiated?

I’ll take it from the Canadian perspective. For us, as I’ve said, following the Chinese prime minister’s visit and the leaders’ summit, what we have agreed is to engage in exploratory talks whether or not there should be an agreement with China. It’s what I call the essential first step — the pre-feasibility study to see which industry, which area we can look at. Officials have already had a first meeting. We’ve launched public consultations about a week ago, because we want to engage civil society. We want to hear from people about opportunities and challenges they may perceive.

So Canada is already on a track with China. We’re taking it step-by-step. The discussions we’re going to have tonight is what we can do as nations to promote and hopefully strengthen free trade within the Asia-Pacific region. We need to make trade real for people. If we take it from that angle, looking at people first, we will come to the conclusion that it serves everyone’s best interests to engage proactively, constructively and positively about what can be done in the Asia-Pacific. Canada wants to be at the front and center of these discussions.

Authors: