social safety net issue really needs to be focused on and that is something that everybody can benefit when from what others do. >> one of the suggestions of course, are good points but to pd constructing is important because if you look at what is going on in the region, there are different elements that are at the basis of these part of a is related to the implication of the

agreements and part of it could be interest. part of it to be from south to west or the perception that is a way of life but this is important to understand those with facts and evidence but if there is one particular aspect that warrants discussion is what is the role of technology to change manufacturing? because part of the effects that are attributed to trade

are more related. so this is the important conversation to be had so i believe it is very hard for trade to carry all the weight of the of burden of economic forces. so looking at the of policies center of competitiveness and it is also quite important. >> just to complement a little bit is the fact that the chase community we cannot be shy. we were trying to explain what it does but to get beyond the big numbers to tell us story but from the

point of view of the private sector some have begun to implement to identify and a worker paychecks represented is related to trade? city is impossible to believe workers at the airport to and then dave bridges of pate in the demonstration against drake there is a complete disconnect with their jobs and that this is due to international trade. so we break the perception and tell them what the story is. so when people have joined and to find the culprit in

with those productivity is in many instances. and unfortunately trade has taken up and against all of the economic uncertainty that existed you put that element with the level of the private sector working with the workers and the community in general come on a larger scale, the issue to redress actively the notion that many facture an - - may fracture in jobs but then look at the other way around in what can we do or

commercial safety net? so what does that mean to retrain though workers? not just because you lost your job and you transit into a new job. that is a lot of analysis but i think it can be done. >> so we will go to the audience for a good you have a question please raise your hand. state your name and affiliation, ask a brief question and ask the question in a form of the oppression. >> please wait for a microphone.

. . >> we have an incoming president who has used the argument reflecting public opinion as an issue in getting elected. he may be be open to some arguments that you have presented if you had 15 minutes to talk to mr. trump, what would you tell him? >> court suites. [laughter]

>> nobody wants to go first. >> first, i would not tell my work for u.s. pr for 30 years. i think one of the points that can made earlier, that's why thought he would go first is let's look at the facts. let's have a review. let's look at what these agreements do and what they don't two. one of the unfortunate things about tpp for example is that it was concluded in the middle of a presidential campaign season. that was not the plan. we're going to concluded earlier but we were great negotiators i knew the deal that was on the table two years earlier was not one we are pretty paired to take home. so we waited.

we got the good do but the timing was really bad. and tpp became the manifestation of everything that was wrong with trade and globalization. so on people were on the floor of the various campaigns with their anti-tpp posters, if you ask any close in tpp nobody knew and nobody cared. so think what i would recommend is that we take a step back, get what's in the agreement what's not in the agreement, we look at what's going on in the asia-pacific region and where it may be headed and where it may be headed with her without us. then we also look at the displaced workers and the people left behind in this and find the appropriate policies to address

their valid concerns but recognizing not doing the tpp is not the answer. it will not help them. >> thank you. i would simply say that for any government in mexico, the u.s. and canada is looking for opportunities for economic growth to increase growth in your country trade is not the problem of that it's a solution. it's it's a mechanism to help us grow the economy. the majority of the customers of the world are outside of north america. that's a realization that we have to understand. we have to understand the history that throughout history countries that have opened up to trade have prospered. those who haven't have not. there's important historical lessons. the second thing i would say to the administration like that the operation of the government as you would to business, mexico and canada are your top customers. we are top clients. mexico top clients.

mexico is not a country that asks for concessions with u.s., we work together, we sell a lot to the u.s., would we buy more and all of the countries combined in all of western europe combined so that has to be valued and we have to work together. as i said competition is fierce. so strength in numbers. canada, mexico and the u.s. building products that are better and cheaper and can compete better worldwide and generate more employment in the united states. >> i would say a few words. first of all politically there's an opportunity to reconcile the american public in particular in the states that he won by surprise with globalization and with trade by doing a number of things. people vote against the agreement, protest because they cannot protest against change, the fact that factory becomes

more productive and therefore you produce more to keep your staffer every year you have to laugh people. that's a natural evolution. and there's an opportunity to improve programs antigen changed trade practices with other countries, and from a european perspective american companies are invested 2,000,000,000,000 dollars dollars in europe and vice versa, tremendous jobs and well-paying jobs on both sides depend on this investment and trade relationship. we should not waste time to improve that. thank you. >> in some ways i would follow the theme from my neighbor about competition being fierce.

in a lot of ways in the africa contexts i would welcome a new lens from a number of friends. as i said, think i'm a little different on the africa side i think local voters don't really support any of the policy related to u.s. africa. at best you have a misunderstanding. you might actually have animosity so it's broader than trade i feel like in the africa world we talk to folks in terms of what kind of policies with people support with something like pep far supported probably, it wasn't but there's policymakers who pushed and took risks. now now people are supported because they understand the positive stories, only later are they supportive as the message gets out. they weren't supportive at the time from a policy perspective on the africa context we all know it. the chinese are growing their market share every day. a number of european countries

that are doing quite well. the india has a strategic view on the continent and how they're growing. when you look at the us, snatches, snatches from a trade policy perspective but the supportive elements you think about some of these things being debated in their existence and in reality were so slow in terms of execution. when i was in the infrastructure space and we would compete most the time we would lose based on timing. the chinese are be able to sign and deliver road in less than two years, have a sponsor from the u.s. saying, i may or may not be a get priority timing at opec or xm, stick with me another year of this cobbling together the financing. another your brother things. these are folks who are trying to win elections and the difference between four years and six years

is losing. so competition is very fierce and i'm not sure that's the mindset that we have taken. we've taken a different mindset towards these tools. lot of our companies are falling further behind in that competition. i don't think thrust of the world is taking that same view toward some of the tools supporting their companies entering the african market. >> i think maybe three points. one is that to make america great again you need more trade, not less trade. the second point is that trade is not a feel something. particular in the world today. it's not that country a exports its own cars were each and every

part of the car is made in country a2 country b and then there's a question between the cars from country a and the carson country b. trey does a work like that in the world today. and the third point is that there's a very valid point and being concerned for those who are either oozing from trade in specific communities and regions are those who have not been able to connect to the benefits of trade. the question there is more what is the best instrument to achieve that objective. trade is not your best instrument. even if terrorists were on interests of a particular country. the manufacturing plant will not come back to your region. if it comes back will be done, and many cases most of it will be done by robots and not necessarily by the people that you are thinking of. so think of the policies that would address some of those concerned and work actively to implement them.

>> i'm laura wright, thank you to all the panelists today for an informative answers. have a quick question. knowing that their strong interest in the u.s., u.k. bad lateral post brexit, how possible is the that t2 could resume before brexit is completed? 's thank you. >> i think the difficulty for any country to negotiate a trade agreement with uk's that you will want to know what other preferences you need and your negotiating from. what is the tariff schedule. was opening that the u.k. is giving to the rest of the world and the rest of the world has agreed with u.k.

and last but not least, what is relationship between the u.k. in the 27 european union, what are the passport and rights of financial firms of insurance companies and banks. are they allowed to sell, they subject to additional requirements? until you know these things you can have talks but they'll be highly speculative talks. therefore like the canadians, if you you want to do a deal with the u.k. to it with the e.u. while it's still in the european union. thank you. >> thank you.

perhaps this question has been answered. does anybody in this group think there's a chance that the trump administration will change its mind on tpp? second question, president-elect trump has said he's interested in doing bilateral -- he doesn't want to anymore multilateral types. any ideas on what might be first in the list of possible bilateral ftes? and i'll throw in another welcome sense and whether they consider the e.u. to be sure to tip to be a bilateral or multilateral agreement? thank you. >> hello. i was 33 questions. you didn't hear the rules. with respect to your first question on what might happen with tpp, my belief and it could be because i worked on it, but also because i believe tpp

advances are economic and strategic interest in the region. i don't think it's dead. i think right now it will be sidelined. i would be surprised if it comes back in some form during the administration. i've seen this with other agreements. i worked on the course agreement, negotiated for the bush administration and then renegotiated under the obama administration. when the obama administration came in there for a critical but they did a thoughtful review of the agreement, figured out how they could improve it so it could receive support not only from congress but the american people and it was successfully done. once again, i know things are different now and the magnitude of frustration and concern about trade and about tpp is greater. i'm an optimist at heart and i have to believe that there is a

way forward. with respect respect to your question on bilaterals. i touched on that. i don't think any of us know which country is of most interest to the new administration in negotiating bilaterals for some people around town are talking about japan bilateral and what i mentioned earlier was that today japan has been pretty clear that it's not interested in a bilateral, it put all his political political capital tpp, it's one original deal once the regional benefits and really joined the tpp to help shape the regional rules of the road. so that is where they are right now, whether that changes going forward remains to be seen. but i think they're putting their eggs in the basket. the basket of trying to be able to convince the new president that tpp has merits, is in the

u.s. interests, as in the u.s. strategic and regional and economic interests. >> want to answer the question on tpp. we have supported tpp all along. it's good for the region, it's good for our negotiations with the u.s. and japan. in four years time if we go through all the negotiations we are currently pursuing we'll be the hub of the most impressive network of free trade agreements. i think if the u.s. wants to catch up to be in their interests. and and finally were negotiated 15 agreements for the moment, 15 countries or groups of countries see us as one it

comes to trade. as a result of the policy review they'll probably find out that you do a deal for european union it's just one deed not a series. >> go back to the audience. >> hello. i'm doug palmer with political. i just wanted to ask wendy, there's some uncertainty about what will be the status of u.s. gr in the new administration whether b is still a cabinet level agency or be play second fiddle to the commerce department. for someone who has worked there for a long time, we think would be the impact on u.s. negotiated ability if it's a cabinet level or if the u.s. gr is seen as

subservient to commerce. and if kenneth or damien have thoughts on this. from a form perspective doesn't matter much to a foreign government whether there negotiating with the u.s. tr or with the comments commerce secretary? >> having been around these issues for a long time working for the government. i've listed many reorganization debates. i understand that this debate is rearing its head again. josé is a negotiator for the american people, you want your negotiator to be totally empowered. he went up to be seen senior and have the mandate to do what they need to do. so if you're good to be negotiating deal we need to keep it a

cabinet level. you need a minister to do this who can meet with other ministers at that level. i'm particularly in the asian region, those levels in it ranks of officials at the table are very important. it would be noticed round the world if we are now going to demote the level of the top u.s. negotiator for trade agreements. >> the only thing i would say is that i would say that ustr has some of the best trade negotiators in the world. i know, if worked with a lot of them for a long time. that's it. >> we needed negotiating in front of us was indeed added an executive level and who is fully empowered. that works both ways. so we also from our partners.

but you don't have a negotiator in every country so we have to adapt. >> hello. i'm right within said u.s. trade. tpp, t tip, these steels didn't seem to come to a halt or be put in the freezer as i believe the popular metaphor is for the most part because of downturn -- before that tpp the congressional fight was struggling before that. so what can be done with each of these different trade negotiations in the plural laterals to move them forward with a new administration other than just the education process. other parts that can be taken away whether it's japan bilateral.

>> i guess people will take the question under advisement and come back. this'll probably be, this might be the last one. >> that name alone sets let's you know i'm coming to the question with a certain attitude. so were almost another hour and half into an intelligent, well-informed discussion on trade and what the american people think about trade. not one reference to unfair trade practices. and so, can so, can i conclude everyone on this stage believes that there are no unfair trade practices that rise to the level of influencing trade flows in the united states.

or the american people who voted for trump that feel like they're not winning because they can't win. are they wrong? >> let's take two other questions while we can. i think there's a one back years and one over here. let's answer them altogether. >> thank you. melinda st. louis from public citizen. my question is for kenneth. in the context, i'm curious whether there's any talk or anything you can share about how the mexican government is perceiving any potential renegotiation in terms of timeline and you expect that to happen right away terms of the truck administration asking for that had how the mexican

government would respond and what are the elements that the mexican government would be willing to renegotiate or not? >> hello. william from intellectual property watch in geneva. i'm tempted to ask her to say that this will be elevated to the desk of president trump who said he will turn up all the agreements to renegotiate them himself, but i'm not asking that. i was wondering was wondering yesterday in geneva there is a reference to this seta agreement. and the two parties announced or tried to gain support for new investor state multilateral investment core that they are trying to create. i don't know panelists are aware of that initiative yet, and if there's any reaction to the idea of a multilateral investor state court.

thank you. >> so let's answer the three questions. >> thank you very much. with regard to the nafta and what will happen. as i have said, mexico is willing and ready to engage in a constructive dialogue with the incoming administration. we favor the possibility of having discussions along the lines of how we strengthen the nafta, how we modernize that along the lines of what i mention. their disciplines that did not exist when nafta was negotiated and that has to be taken into consideration to bring up the agreement to the requirements of the 21st century economy, it's a reality in fact and that's how we operate in all the trade agreements that were negotiated. it's impossible to think that you can simply extrapolate what we have negotiated and other

agreements in bringing exactly as it is into the north american region. you have to look at the specific peculiarities of the region. in terms of the timeline, of course we are working on analyzing what elements can be strengthened. were going through a process of internal consultation both with the private sector, civil society arising within the ministry of economy. look at some of the things we've done in trade agreements for a guideline to some of the key elements were interested inches in that the world turns largest largest exporter were interested in being able to eliminate all not only tariff barriers that no longer exist with very few exceptions but elements that facilitate trade and go beyond the border that help us get real

access to our products are out the world. that some of the elements were working on with north america. in terms of the timing it will depend the substance of what we discuss will depend on the perspective of what the u.s. and canada, let's not forget about canada what they bring to the table. but we we are very open to working within the framework that allows us to strengthen the very successful free-trade agreement that we have built over 25 years. >> we have responded to the criticism in europe against ics which was seen as privatized just as giving excessive rates for foreign investors, paper savings, arbitrators who could be having conflict of interest and which would propose a modernized system which we agreed to. the canadians and but if you do

that and tens of agreements you create a problem when you want to have an investment court where you can have judges settling these disputes. maybe you are not there but we talked about reform of tdi. we are changing it to create exceptions to allow us when there is excess capacity are market distortions and raw materials to impose duties that are higher than the current duties. in stimulating the trade defense by proposing the removal of nonmarket economy companies that want to change the rules. when he trade defense to deal with these unfair practices and indeed you cannot do on one hand

trade organization without having the strong and robust tdi >> if i can add to that, i think you're you're right. the conversations perhaps focused more negotiations that different countries in different regions of this world were engaged inches but that by no means lessens the critical importance of tracing unfair trade practices. my colleagues at the commerce department, the the state and embassies abroad do this day day in and day out. you need to make sure that after we put all of our efforts in negotiating trade agreements want to make sure trading partners live up to them and also make sure that if there are unfair trade practices they're keeping our products and services out address. i welcome president-elect trumps emphasis on what he called the enforcement issue and

strengthening that function in the u.s. government under his upcoming administration. i think that is a very helpful initiative and i think as a result were going to see more cases filed both in the wto mark aggressive use of our trade laws. in my view as long as it's done in the context of living up to our rules that we have agreed to in the wto and elsewhere than i think this is a very welcome step forward. >> i think that's a good positive note ten this conversation on. i invite can up to the podium to make final remarks. >> thank you steven tour panelists. it's been a great conversation. looking forward. looking forward to hosting more conversations in the months to come. a lot of questions of the trade community and around the world about the u.s. will be doing and we plan on illuminated those

issues. were grateful for you for being here. thank you and thank you to all of you. watch your inbox for more events coming up. [applause] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] >> c-span's "washington journal", live everyday with

news and policy issues that impact too. coming up friday morning, usa today white house reporter gregory will discuss president obama's use of executive orders. we'll talk about how the obama record compares to previous presidents on how president-elect donald trump could reverse or modify obama executive orders after being inaugurated. then david strickland, council for safer streets. he talks about the future of self driving cars and how technology companies, automakers and regulators are working to safely bring the technology on the market. and we'll talk about the serious civil war. the latest on the battle for aleppo in the conflict that's been raging for almost six years. watch c-span's washingto