and about 30 per cent of mexico ’ s. we can talk about how many times a single auto part might cross a national border during the assembly process. and we can talk about the intricate supply chains that have been developed over more than 50 years. or, we can show how building a single, integrated north american auto industry has led to jobs in all three countries. the automotive parts manufacturers ’ association has done a good job putting the numbers together. in canada, 81, 000 people are employed in the automotive supply sector, by both canadian and foreign - owned firms. those canadian companies operate 150 plants in the united states, employing almost 43, 000 american workers, and 120 plants in mexico, providing jobs for roughly the same number of workers there. it is hard to imagine how interfering with open trade or implementing other protectionist policies would benefit these people and their families. it would be helpful to hear many more examples from other industries. policy - makers, business leaders and labour leaders all have a role to play in showing how open trade has meant jobs for workers across north america and around the world. nobody can explain the importance of trade to an employee better than their employer. regardless of what evolves, though, there is no shortage of potential sources of growth for both of our economies. the first order of business should be to keep working on opening trade elsewhere in the world. in this respect, canada has been playing catch - up to mexico, which has successfully negotiated access to many more markets than canada. the numbers tell a clear story. as of today, canada has free trade agreements in force with 15 countries that represent about 22 per cent of global gdp. mexico has agreements in force with 47 countries that represent 44 per cent of global gdp. but if you take the united states out of the picture, canada is left with free access to just 6 per cent of the world economy, compared with 28 per cent for mexico. the good news for canada is that this gap will close significantly once the agreement between canada and the european union comes into effect. it is unfortunate that the trans - pacific partnership, with its ground - breaking coverage of intellectual property and services, has been shelved for now. still, the work that was put into those areas could prove useful for both canada and mexico in future trade agreements. the bottom line is there is still scope for both countries to improve access to markets outside of north america. 4 / 5 bis central bankers'speeches within canada, we had the positive news

though the first quarter of 2016. this meant a significant hit to our national income, about $ 70 billion in that period, or roughly 3. 5 per cent of canada ’ s annual gross domestic product ( gdp ). meanwhile, mexico ’ s national income declined by about 500 billion pesos, or about 2. 5 per cent of annual gdp. in response to the shock, our currencies depreciated — the peso dropped by 28 per cent against the us dollar during the same period, while the canadian dollar declined about 20 per cent. of course, some amount of depreciation was not surprising. it was a natural consequence of the shock, and it helped economic adjustments happen by sending signals that prompted shifts in investment and employment. although both currencies rebounded early in 2016, the peso then began to fall again, while the canadian dollar more or less stabilized. global capital flows were likely one important factor. 1 / 5 bis central bankers'speeches historically, flows in and out of mexican capital markets have been closely tied to investor sentiment about emerging markets. capital flows into mexico fell sharply in 2015 and remained low in 2016, as the us federal reserve prepared to raise interest rates and eventually began tightening monetary policy. this put additional downward pressure on the peso, on top of the pressure coming from lower oil prices that both canada and mexico faced. in terms of output, though, the oil price shock hit canada harder than mexico. the canadian economy contracted outright early in 2015, while growth in mexico remained fairly stable. this reflected, in part, the fact that canada is a bigger oil producer than mexico is — at the end of last year, canadian output was about twice as large as mexico ’ s. for canada, the oil price shock meant a significant shifting of capital and workers out of the oil and gas industry. it established a two - track economy : while the non - resource sector continued to expand, it was not enough to offset the sharp decline in the resource sector. from the start of 2015, the negative impact of the resource track dominated. while the adjustment process in canada has been complex, and very difficult on a personal level for many, we are seeing encouraging signs that the worst may be over. activity and investment in the oil and gas industry have stopped declining and are coming back to a level that is commensurate with current prices. and because that large negative force is now essentially past, it is no longer masking the sources of strength