Experts urge Canada to secure EU advantages with hard rules as associate-member jargon muddles talks
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
Academic specialists told Canada’s foreign affairs committee that Ottawa should protect its relationship with the European Union through concrete legal mechanisms instead of drifting on the vague idea of associate membership, which has created confusion and political theatre.
Academic experts on European Union policy testified before the House foreign affairs committee on Monday, urging Canada to lock in its recent gains with the EU in binding legal frameworks. Their testimony came after a Montreal summit that brought together senior Canadian and EU officials and showed that practical cooperation still depends on discipline, not slogans.
University of Toronto professor Mark Manger said many of the existing agreements are “essentially expressions of intent” and called for a concrete announcement, noting that Mexico already enjoys a range of EU arrangements that Canada is now pursuing. His argument was straightforward: Canada should stop leaving opportunities on the table and move quickly to secure tangible benefits.
The discussion highlighted ongoing confusion over the term “associate member,” which European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has used to describe a potential future status for Canada. Prime Minister Mark Carney had previously avoided the phrase, referring instead to an “alliance for the future,” but later affirmed the goal of associate EU membership, a concept that lacks an official definition and needs far more precision before it can mean anything useful.
Achim Hurrelmann, co-director of the Centre for European Studies at Carleton University, described the terminology as a distraction from substantive policy work, adding that both leaders appear keen to keep the phrase in public discourse for its symbolic appeal. He said any final arrangement will need to fall between a political declaration and a formal status, which would require treaty amendments in the EU and parliamentary approval in Canada, making this a serious institutional challenge rather than a public-relations exercise.
Hurrelmann suggested viewing associate membership as a “symbolic affirmation” of deepening ties rather than a legal requirement, and warned that the proposals under discussion do not depend on that status to be implemented. He also noted the need for rapid action, given concerns in some European countries about far-right movements skeptical of external partnerships, underscoring why governments need to be clear-eyed about political risks.
Anand Sundar, a transatlantic defence adviser at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said the push for associate membership appears driven by the European Commission, despite opposition from member states such as Germany. That divide suggests the issue is still unsettled and not something Canada should treat as guaranteed.
The experts called for restructuring the Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) to improve economic outcomes, proposing changes to its “mixed agreement” status, which currently requires ratification by each EU member. Of the bloc’s 27 members, nine have not yet fully applied CETA, showing that even existing trade commitments can be slowed by bureaucracy and hesitation.
Hurrelmann pointed to ongoing disputes over food regulations, including Canadian dairy quotas and the geographic labeling of products like feta cheese, and argued that while CETA introduced innovative regulatory alignment clauses, their limited success has restrained trade growth. This illustrates the need for clearer rules and better execution if the agreement is to deliver for businesses and consumers.
Manger recommended enhancing the trade deal with clearer economic and legal parameters to give Canadian firms confidence in a long-term relationship, even suggesting that European mobile-network operators be allowed to operate in Canada in exchange for reduced Canadian food import restrictions. The underlying idea was reciprocity: if Canada wants market access, it should be prepared to negotiate firmly.
Both scholars emphasized that deeper cooperation should focus on areas where the EU has clear jurisdiction, such as research, academic exchanges, defence, and energy, and that cross-party collaboration in Canada will be essential for any progress.