Sep 20, 2018
Osler partner Peter Glossop tells The Globe and Mail that having no NAFTA deal is a worst-case scenario as Canada and the U.S. try and resolve outstanding issues in pursuit of a new agreement. In his article, author John Ibbitson explores whether having a bad NAFTA deal would be worse or better for Canada than no deal at all. The article describes the challenges involved in the negotiations process and outlines the implications if no new agreement is reached between Canada and the U.S. Peter, a partner in Osler’s Competition/Antitrust & Foreign Investment Group who has written extensively on international trade issues, explains.
“It would be worse not to have a deal at all,” Peter tells The Globe and Mail. “The price of no deal could be losing the existing NAFTA.”
Peter also offers up a worst-case scenario if no deal is reached between Canada and the U.S., according to the article: “The final text of the U.S.-Mexico agreement would be published at the end of September; Mr. Trump would give six months’ notice that he is terminating NAFTA; the United States and Mexico would sign their bilateral agreement at the end of November; in 2019, Congress would implement the U.S.-Mexico accord, while repealing NAFTA’s implementing legislation, leaving Canada with no trade agreement of any kind with the United States.”
If you subscribe to The Globe and Mail online, read author John Ibbitson’s article “A bad NAFTA deal? Canada should take it and run.”