Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Globe Essay

The sabre-rattling on NAFTA is worrying, but take it as an opportunity

MICHAEL HART AND WILLIAM DYMOND

From Saturday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 3:52 PM EDT 04/04/08

Canadians have to lead the way when dealing with the U.S., and ignore the noise from its politicians ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Bert Russell Paradox, BC from Canada writes:

    Excellent article ..... a de.ja vu of GM past articles, almost forgotten.
  2. siren call from Canada writes: I was reading along in good faith, sure that even though these are 2 goofs who failed to negotiate good deals with either FTA or NAFTA, they might still have something to say. While I can see that Martin's government might have annoyed the Bush agenda, specifically re. the ballistic missile shield -- Harper's government brought maturity? Hack much, politically, guys? Harper left over a billion on the softwood lumber table, a day b4 we were going to win it all. Harper's attitude to the USA is subservience. Which is what these guys offer. Just look at the questions they are asking: _What can we do together to promote our common interests in the security of the Arctic What further steps can be taken to promote cross-border regulatory co-operation? What kind of institutional capacity do we need to have in place to facilitate and promote the governance of North American economic and security concerns and to ensure appropriate co-operation at the state/provincial and legislative levels?_ The Americans aren't interested in protecting the arctic but in exploiting it and they sure don't recognize it as ours. Our common energy sector? The oil sands are not common; they are ours. Only Americans speak differently. Key to the argument is the heavy use of the term North America to replace Canada and USA. This is the deep integration, Security Protection and Prosperity Agenda writ large. We either lose Harper and his half wit neo-conservatives or we lose Canada.
  3. siren call from Canada writes: I was reading along in good faith, sure that even though these are 2 goofs who failed to negotiate good deals with either FTA or NAFTA, they might still have something to say.

    While I can see that Martin's government might have annoyed the Bush agenda, specifically re. the ballistic missile shield -- Harper's government brought maturity? Hack much, politically, guys?

    Harper left over a billion on the softwood lumber table, a day b4 we were going to win it all. Harper's attitude to the USA is subservience.

    Which is what these guys offer. Just look at the questions they are asking:

    _What can we do together to promote our common interests in the security of the Arctic

    What further steps can be taken to promote cross-border regulatory co-operation?

    What kind of institutional capacity do we need to have in place to facilitate and promote the governance of North American economic and security concerns and to ensure appropriate co-operation at the state/provincial and legislative levels?_

    The Americans aren't interested in protecting the arctic but in exploiting it and they sure don't recognize it as ours. Our common energy sector? The tar sands are not "common" they are ours. Only Americans project a different reality.

    Key to the argument is the heavy use of the term North America to replace Canada and USA.

    This is the deep integration, Security Protection and Prosperity Agenda writ large..

    We either lose Harper and his half wit neo-conservatives or we lose Canada.
  4. siren call from Canada writes: Bert Russell Paradox -- you are a study in projection on this issue.

    You agree with the politics of deep integration and so, deem this rubbish piece, "good journalism" or good newspaper reading.
  5. Duane Freemantle from writes: Protectionism can be both detrimental and advantageous for a country. On either side of the coin, it is important that a nation that it safeguarding itself. The nation must be resilient to change, and accept that changes will occur. Politicians do not have to sell us change, but work with the nations leaders (industrial, educational, etc) to make the nations state resilient to change. The article clear demonstrations this. Canadians expect their politicians to be cordial with each other, and other nations leaders. However, Canadian with interests put first. Putting U.S. interests first is characteristic of American politicians, and Americans expect this.
  6. The Middle Finger ..I.. from Canada writes: It would be a good time to get our sovereignty back particularly around issues re: oil and gas and other natural resources.
  7. otto von abbatoir from Los Angeles, United States writes: The average American has a far more sophisticated understanding of the costs and benefits of trade than the average Canadian because we deal with its consequences every single day. All the beaver caterwauling about NAFTA fails to recognize what the Billary & Obama's comments/codewords are all about: Mexico. Unsurprisingly, it's not mentioned once in the article. As a sidebar, Putin is welcome to as much of the Canadian Artic as he can bully out of you. It's irrelevant to people in Ohio or Texas. Mexico is not. Mexico's continuing and multi-hundred year history as a failed state for no good reason, is a never ending source of instability across the USA. That's what Billary & Obama are pandering to. Obliterated nation-states like Germany & Japan have rebuilt themselves out of the ashes in 10-15 years while Mexico, blessed with far more natural advantages than either, continues to fulfill its destiny as the global underachiever. If Canada wishes to bring an agenda to the table, the first order of business will be how many tens of millions of Mexicans she will absorb in order to make NAFTA work.
  8. janfromthe bruce from Canada writes: This is the deep integration, Security Protection and Prosperity Agenda writ large. We either lose Harper and his half wit neo-conservatives or we lose Canada.

    SSP, without saying it. I noted that not once did these two guys talk about bread and butter issues of mainstreet, nor protecting individual countries right to make public policy such as in the area of labour or the environment - sorry but not interested in NAFTA 2 and more rights for investors.

    Nothing about labour or the fact since NAFTA, real incomes of the middle and lower class have stagnated since signing of NAFTA - across NORTH AMERICA - or not one national program has been created since then. I see that was the plan. NAFTA is just another corporate welfare program for the rich and powerful.

    Don't get fooled again.
  9. Kurtis Smith from Canada writes: YES Siren Call!!! It is a slow and subtle campaign to push the masses where our leaders want them to go.
    The AMERO and the North American Union scare the heck out of me. Since they are surely leading to One World Government, a NWO and an Orwellian society.

    Tell everyone who will listen. Have them You tube AMERO and the others. :)
  10. The Middle Finger ..I.. from Canada writes: To otto von abbatoir from Los Angeles, United States who wrote: The average American has a far more sophisticated understanding of the costs and benefits of trade than the average Canadian because we deal with its consequences every single day.

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    My experience has been that most Americans couldn't point their own neighborhood out on a map no matter know where New York City or Canada nor be able to debate the intricasies of NAFTA. Now as to being able to find Mexico on a map, I'm sure that might be a different story.
  11. Allan McElroy from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Re Otto's comment above re Mexico; I'm happy to hear it and I hope you're right. I would be perfectly happy to get rid of Mexico as a free-trade partner. Why on earth are we giving preferential treatment to a country where the rule of law is subject to the whims of corrupt officials, and where they pay their police so little that they have to shake people down to feed their families? I am tired of hearing stories about Canadians in Mexican prisons without due process(currently of course Ms. Martin). Why do we do business with them? Why do so many of us visit them as tourists?
  12. John Percy from Halifax, Canada writes: siren call from Canada writes: The tar sands are not "common" they are ours. "

    Actually SC, they belong to the Americans. All the oil sands leases are under American control, the companies expoiting the oil sands are American (with the exception of PetroCanada), the pipeline is US owned and runs directly south to the US, not east-west, and the royalty rate that Alberta charges is the lowest in the world to attract foreign investment. Everyone east of Toronto still relies on Middle East oil.

    We cannot threaten to cut off the supply of oil to the US. They'll just laugh and keeping pumping south. No American company is going to deprive his countrymen of energy or his company of profits, and neither would we.
  13. Ross MacGillivray from Vernon, B.C., Canada writes: Having had a little time to think about the comments made by Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama during the Ohio primary with respect to Nafta, I have three points I would like to make, including one with respect the comment from Otto from Los Angeles

    1. As a nation that has believed in labour standards for at least decades, why would Canada not want an enhanced labour standards agreement, particular if this improves the stability of the NAFTA agreement.

    2. Canadian obsess over the environment, so why would Canada not want to at least try to negotiate an enhanced environmental protocol?

    3. With respect to one comment from Otto of Los Angeles, as a generous nation state, Canada should at least consider encouraging some immigration from Mexico, if such immigration is helpful to the North American community.
  14. Les Caine from Canada writes: Free Trade/Nafta is a Charter of Rights for multinationals who almost invariably are American. If Canadians what to end up American in all but name, don't change a thing. Free Trade was a bad deal for Canada only compounded by NAFTA. A tweak here and there will not transform it into a good deal.

    Sovereignty can be priceless.
  15. Canada 10016 from New York City, United States writes: This is a useful article. Finally some diversity and balance in the writing found in the pages of the Globe and Mail.
  16. Albin Forone from Toronto, Canada writes: The US is experiencing an export resurgence with its dollar decline and is not going to go bonkers to restrict trade in the face of what appears to be a domestic consumption emergency. With its strong currency, strong labour laws, and strong environmental policies (no thanks to the federal Tory government for any of these) Canada should be a natural ally, not an enemy, of a reformist Democrat administration in Washington seeking to reform global trade relations (again, no thanks ....) Canada should have its own agenda centering on trade agreement enforcement, to avoid the lengthy and costly litigations and unilateral sanctions that have troubled our trade relations with the US.
  17. siren call from Canada writes: John Percy from Halifax, Canada writes:
    Actually SC, they belong to the Americans. All the oil sands leases are under American control..
    ............................

    I'm not sure tar sand ownership is quite as completely American as you state. Norway is involved, for one.

    But -- do you think it is a sane policy to let any one country dominate the industry and dictate by what environmental laws it will (not) be constrained or how much it will (not) pay in royalties?
  18. Garry Sugden from Richmond Hill, Canada writes: Tony Blair's conversation with Bush at the time of the Lebanon conflict made the facts of life clear. One does not coordinate with America; One either follows the American course or One follows their own course.

    Having said that, there is a huge ingredient of imperialism in the US headset. Canadians recognize it because they experienced vicarious imperia through the British experience (and were dang proud of it!) . It is a simple thing to attach yourself to power and make like it is your own.

    At this point I prefer an independent and diplomacy based foreign policy, as ineffectual as it might be, to a military based foreign policy which effective or not, isn't really ours.
  19. Ed Lewis from Sanityville, Canada writes: Scuttle NAFTA and get rid of Harper...otherwise, Canada is lost to the Americans.
  20. Robert Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: "As former officials involved in the negotiation... we are gratified to see such solicitude for these two treaties..."

    And I am gratified to see that two of the ejeets involved in the negotiations step up to admit that "thea culpa."

    The Mexican negotiators seem to have done a superior job (particularly with respect to energy) than their Canadian counter-parts did...
  21. I darthcricket from Toronto, Canada writes: Did anyone mention water? NAFTA is a sword hanging over our head and one instance of exporting water will bleed all the water out of our control to lawns, pools and desert farms of the U.S.

    So if we are looking for closer integration with the U.S. then let's all pack our bags now and go to Arizona (if they'll let you in).

    World Water Day is this Saturday and a child dies every six seconds from lack of clean water.
  22. E. Biggs from Canada writes: If any of you think that any one country owns anything you are mistaken. As an investor I invest in companies in Austrailia, China, the USA and several African countries. While the head office might be in one particular country there is little that country can do to impact much of their decisions. If a country tries to impose restrictive policies, the head office is moved to somewhere else and it is business as usual. The tar sands are primarily US as without them there would be little if any development there, it is by American headquartered companies and for the US market. Canada is too small to be much of a factor and on a percentage very few of our people invest in Canada and that is not about to change. We did have something virtually unique to Canada in the Income trusts which helped develop the energy sector but that has been finished and we have had to invest in the American version "Master Limited Partnerships". Our country is of little consequence on the world financial scene and there is not sign that this is going to change. I darthcricket I am ahead of you as I have been in Arizona for the last 4 months and enjoying it, great people and fantastic climate. Come and join us there are thousands of Canadians here all buying property and trying to stay permanently.
  23. 4Cryin Outloud from Canada writes: Union jobs declining since the 1970s but international trade has "...fuelled the growth of high technology..." What high technology specificly and how has that been good for us?

    And if things get ugly it's about time that Canadians and USAmericans realize that "... an Apple iPod sold in the U.S. for $299, $160 goes to American companies that design, transport and retail iPods. Only $4 stays in China with the firms that assemble the devices." And for us that do know this realize that renegotiation of NATA and globalization that benefits the over-developed nations has to be dealt with NOW - BEFORE things get ugly. More war anyone?

    "The Harper government brought maturity and perspective, but it is still difficult to discern to what purpose the Prime Minister wants to put this civility."

    If one considers adulation and "follow the leader" to be mature and civil then I agree. More reason to vote ABCL if we ever get a chance to vote again.

    AND TO KEEP US SAFE AND RICH?
    Simple, Balistic Missile Defence anyone? SPP anyone? NAU anyone?
    Not hard to see that these two want us to continue supporting the military industiral complex far into the future. Things are going to get ugly don't you ever doubt it with this kind of fearful status quo-mentality.
  24. michael hoepfner from Canada writes:
    NAFTA only benefits multinationals whose trade is mostly internal anyway - it doesn't trickle down to the average Joe on the street. What does trickle down is the environmental devastation these gluttonous corporations mete out.

    The proposed North American Union will be the final assurance that the US will take Canada and Mexico down the toilet with itself.

    Let's hear it for progress!
  25. liz fox from nanaimo, Canada writes: NAFTA actually made very little difference to our ability to trade with the US; tarriffs were already low and the GATT was a workable agreement to reduce further problems without giving the whole show away to "investors" which is what NAFTA was really about. 97% of post NAFTA investment has been for buyouts of Canadain companies not for new enterprise. The low Canadian dollar had the most important impact on trade.The internalised subservience of the pro-NAFTA lobby is worrying; they continually feel that we have nothing to offer, are of no importance to the US unless we bend over and do as we're told. Currently the US is reliant on the oils sands to replace its increasingly threatened sources from Venezuela, Nigeria etc etc. Canada should raise its royalties and ensure Eastern Canada's energy security and not be so worried about genuflecting to the US who is perfectly capable of looking after itself!
  26. Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: FOOD is cheaper than it has been for over 10 years and not because of NAFTA. This is because we have encouraged free trade with a lot of the under-developed countries so we can now get fresh vegetables at such extra cheap prices during the winter months. NAFTA is a BAD deal for Canada when you consider that we cannot buy our energy cheaper than we sell it to the Americans who now buy 60% and when you consider that they dump their agricultural products on us if no one else wants to deal with them because they are poor trading partners; and when you consider how many times we have had to take them to the Agency under appeal and even when we win, we have to wait and wait for our money (and then still lose some- remember the $1B softwood lumber deal given by Emerson). AND then there is Chapter 11 which allows their manufacturing corporations to override the Government who wants to prevent cancerous drugs from being used and leaving residues in the product being sold in the supermarkets. AND THEN THERE IS OUR WATER.
  27. bob london from Canada writes: Y. Wackoff, you may want to get your facts straight before you hurdle false statements like your buddy Dion. 1. The Americans were right in the Softwood Lumber Agreement. Through Credits and Forest Licences we give the wood for free as long as we hire more people than necessary. The Liberals use this Social Economic Policy which is a cost but due to that cost we provide subsidies so they get credits in the interior. Emerson knows and that is why the agreement to only give up 1B wasn't bad. The downside is the Liberal Propeganda is not helping. Open markets would help, longer forest licenses for ROI due to forest type would help but then again like all Liberals you are interested in Intelectual Masterbation and Hyperbole and not RESULTS. 2. Our farmers do have fair prices. The problem is the bureaucrats the Liberals keep putting in the way. Canadian Wheat Board employees have ensured that our brewery's and distillers have not bought Canadian since the 1960's. Our local cheese artisans shut down or ship in milk from the US because the Ontario Dairy Association is exceeding their mandate and behaving in a national socialistic mannter. The downside is the consumers and the farmer are f****d. Liberal Propeganda can not spin this any better. 3. Your Liberal protection of the Canadian Banks does not help the bush or the farm since your ignorant collegues have MBA's and have never gone further north than the Muskoka's. International experience for a liberal is usually an all inclusive resort in CUBA. Trudeau's socialist best friend and advisor. So!! BEFORE YOU CONTINUE TO SPEW PROPEGANDA, GET IN YOUR VW BUS AND VISIT A FARM OR THE BUSH AND STOP BEING AN ARMCHAR ENVIRONMENTALIST OR ECONOMIST AND MEET THE CANADIANS YOU ARE NEGATIVELY AFFECTING. Your liberal spin and propeganda will continue to destroy the country and the boomers will have destroyed what their parents, the greatest generation, fought for.
  28. Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: bob london from Canada writes: Y. Wackoff, you may want to get your facts straight before you hurdle false statements like your buddy Dion."

    WHAT a silly person you are; you didn't argue on any of my points, just slandered me unwittingly. I AM A FARMER, HAVE BEEN FOR 50 years - successfully, raised two honourable, ethical and financially independent sons, as well as helping a lot of other young people otherwise. I do not defend any banks as you may infer, and I am not judgmental on any person or institution, but I am at least intelligent and do not just write (grammatically) to slam anyone with a different opinion. Maybe, you should go to some correctional institute to learn to be courteous, first of all. If I can help you get a 'real' job instead of just 'hacking for the Conservatives', please let me know.

    PLEASE TELL, WHAT HAVE YOU DONE!
  29. George L. from Canada writes: "Canadians have to lead the way"
    When is it going to dawn on these people that Canada is so friggin' far behind, we just think we're leading the way.
  30. Dr Demento from Canada writes: otto von abbatoir from Los Angeles, United States writes:

    "The average American has a far more sophisticated understanding of the costs and benefits of trade than the average Canadian because we deal with its consequences every single day."

    Then you must be glad that you and your fellow Americans have been living above your means for the past 31 years you have been accumulating ever growing trade deficits . . .
  31. Roger Abram from Canada writes: Re Siren Call post.
    Excellent. The deep integration of Canada and Mexico into the USA is well underway thanks to the CCCEO and SPP. The authors of the article must be aware of this. Reopen NAFTA and let's have fair trade - not the so called free trade that document embodies.
  32. Marvist Clank from Alberta, Canada writes: During the NAFTA debate I was a rabid defender. I even won a cut little painting from Canadian Business Magazine for one piece. My perspective is purely classical Liberal or libertarian. Regardless of the situation, comparative advantage will benefit everyone by liberalizing trade. However, after living in the US and listening to the same ignorance I listened to here (5 years later) and watching a hypocritical ignorant Jimmy Carter argue against Canada in the softwood lumber dispute, it has become obvious that Canada has gained little in our trade relationship with the US outside of cars and some commodities. Outside of that dealing with Congress is like dealing with a hornets nest. Look at the one sided arguments in beef and wheat as well. The consequences of American trade bullying in these issues that a 'Golden Horseshoe' individual might think of as minor is wholly devastating to rural communities in Canada. This American behaviour wipes whole Canadian communities off of the map. Right now I am of the opinion if they want to renegotiate NAFTA ... sure. But in the end, the energy provisions and all the market integration aspects in resources and labor should be changed to give us back a hammer. A hammer we need to deal with Congress that wrecks any deal you do with the American government and makes talking to them pointless. If they don't take it. Pull out and start using the hammer ... or can of RAID.
  33. Fake Name from Canada writes: Indeed, Darthcricket, control over our fresh water is one of the most important issues.
  34. Bert Russell Paradox, BC from Canada writes:
    Siren Call: do you look at everything as a Liberal Partisan issue?
  35. Violet Eichhorn from Vancouver, Canada writes: [[[[["Ideas and initiatives have always had to come from Canada because Americans do not devote a lot of thought to the Canada-U.S. relationship, and when they do come up with ideas, Canadians are quick to see these as threatening."]]]]

    Neither country (the USA or Canada) respects any treaties with any other people.

    For proof, you Canadians have done a lot of environmental damage with your mining corporations aka uranium mines.

    Uranium poisoning does not discriminate among people, so get a crip on yourselves people and start adhering to the Treaties the First Nations made with the Crown early on, before, ALL this enironmental damage was done.

    Shame Shame Shame...and you wonder why the sea life are dwindling, or you act surprised when a whale is found dead on the beach.

    STOP DUMPING NUCLEAR WASTE IN THE OCEAN...STOP THE URANIUM MINING...STOP THE LOGGING INDUSTRY...that's the reason the air and water are so polluted... arrrrrrrgggggg...where were you people when god was giving out intelligent genes...Your ship sailed on that one.

    Respect this planets' life giving environment and "it" will return the same respect for LIFE in all living beings.

    Cheers

    Violet
  36. Violet Eichhorn from Vancouver, Canada writes: [[[["George L. from Canada writes: "Canadians have to lead the way"
    When is it going to dawn on these people that Canada is so friggin' far behind, we just think we're leading the way. "]]]]

    I had a dog like that, when we would walk her, she would always noisily yelp and whine to be in front of us and she couldn't hunt either.

    Cheers

    Violet
  37. Gold Standard from Canada writes: I want sovereignty back and NAFTA GONE! We should be able to make better deals than NAFTA to help workers and ask for Canadian money for our oil. This would strengthen our dollar and keep inflation low here then we could move to a gold standard slowly in time. We would BUY DOMESTIC keep domestic prices low because it will be on a stable VALUABLE currency. We could count on how much we would need to retire. We could work less hours and support a ONE INCOME family if we want. Our currency would be wanted by all countries as a store of value for the world if they can afford to buy it. We should trade excess material ONLY to a variety of countries so we are not joined at the hip with ANY COUNTRY. We would then truly be able to make the country we always wanted. We should have a loose federation of states that keep current agreements (equalization, trade etc)but have our own social policy (gun registry, abortion INC). We should have a government and banks focused on lowering prices (deflating) for all of us ELEVATING our standard of living. We would not need so many raises and strikes with a gold standard because inflation would not be pressing wages.

    Sounds like my perfect country:) So forget NAFTA. Why should we ship all of our truly valuable resources away like water and wood. Lets ship bottled water and finished lumber made in our mills. Let them pony up the gold to buy our oil or another worthwhile currency forget the toilet paper in America.
  38. Doug - from Canada writes: Just a comment on "All the oil sands leases are under American control, the companies expoiting the oil sands are American (with the exception of PetroCanada), "

    Wrong- Encana, Nexen, Syncrude (ownership is mixed), Suncor, MEG Energy I would say are Canadian with some foreign ownership

    Esso, part Canadian

    Not, Shell though was part, Total bought out Canadian small outfit, JACOS - jap, Devon US.

    Why do people always say its owned by americans, go buy some Ecana stock and you can own it too
  39. Beaverton Bob from Beaverton ON, Canada writes: For Bob London: You left out the U in masturbate. I'm glad you are on to the real thing with none of this intellectual stuff
  40. GARY SACK from seattle, United States writes: Between Darthcricket and Billary iam having a blast reading this conversation-from what i can tell the U S of A wants EVERYTHING. the u.s. wants to have its cake and eat it. Most consumers are in debt up to their neck,care about nothing that canadians need, and probably dont realize what NAFTA does to benefit or hrt them-from the photos I have seen TORONTO is an gorgeous city to view at night!
  41. Ed Lewis from Sanityville, Canada writes: FAIR trade, not FREE trade!!!

    Here we are slowly being absorbed into the US and most people are too stupid to see it.....instead their attention is fixed on the shiny baubles that NAFTA allegedly makes more affordable....if it weren't so depressing it would be laughable.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top