Trump administration reveals goals for NAFTA talks – Politics

United States Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer has released his negotiating objectives ahead of talks to revise the North American Free Trade Agreement next month.

MORE TO COME

Previous story:

The goals for the renegotiation, as well as the Trump administration’s rationale for how these objectives will lead to an agreement beneficial to the U.S., must be published on the USTR website, as required by Congress in accordance with the trade promotion authority granted to the White House for renegotiating a standing agreement like this.

Formal talks to revise NAFTA are expected to start next month. Such objectives must be published 30 days in advance.

The Canadian government is not required to publish its negotiating objectives ahead of the formal talks, expected to start on or shortly after Aug. 17. The location has not been finalized.

While Canada has been consulting formally and informally — an official consultation period expires Tuesday — politicians, officials and negotiators have been talking to affected industries for weeks to prepare Canada’s bargaining positions.

They’re expected to continue to do so throughout the process, although Parliament does not require the kind of transparency Congress does.

“The other NAFTA parties — Canada and Mexico … their position has been: the U.S. wanted to re-open this and modernize it. We’re just coming along,” international trade lawyer Dan Ujczo told CBC News last week. “So I think in some ways the U.S. is going to set the agenda.”

“If it comes out really short and sweet with a very narrow set of lists, that’s indicating that they want to get this done as quick as possible,” he said. But if it isn’t a deep dive, Ujczo expects Congress to demand more specifics.

Congressional review tomorrow

The House of Representatives ways and means committee’s subcommittee on trade has already scheduled a meeting to review these negotiating objectives Tuesday.

Mexico has…

Read the full article from the Source…

Leave a Reply