American Ambassador David Jacobson.Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press
David Jacobson, the US Ambassador to Canada, spoke to the Globe and Mail editorial board Friday about the continental security perimeter, the benefits and challenges for Canada and the U.S.
Q: What does the plan accomplish?
I think that there has been kind of a breakthrough in our thinking over the last year or so. Up until then there was this view that either we were going to have a secure border or we were going to have an efficient border. We were going to have more trade [or]we were going to have more security. But those things are not inconsistent in any way. We were going to do fewer of the stupid things that we have been doing and more of the smart things. And that we would try to move as many of the decisions as far away from the border as we possibly could. The border being the worst possible place that you can make decisions about anything. It is a bottleneck, there is no recourse, there is a guy standing there who says you didn't bring the right piece of paper.
Q: How can things be simplified?
The way to do that is to share information. To get information about people and about goods before they get to the border, so that you can make those decisions in a more rational way, I think really underlies a lot of this. The leaders and their relationship and the people of our two countries are such that the stars were in alignment.
You guys probably have a better sense of what the public thinks here in Canada than I do, but I have been pleased at the response so far. I think it has been generally positive. A lot the reservations that have been expressed are based upon inaccurate understandings of the deal. I think this was an important thing in our relationship, and the test now is whether we are going to live up to the plan that we put forward. Everybody ought to hold our feet to the fire. This is just a plan, and if we don't execute on it nothing is going to change. It is going to take months before any of these things are apparent, and it will takes perhaps a couple of years before some of them are.
Q: The perception is that the U.S. got a big win with the entry/exit agreement. What is the gain for Canada?
That is not how this works. This is not, we got this and we got that. That really misconstrues what is happening. We both got more trade, and this is something that is very very important. You heard the president talking about trade and jobs and doubling exports in five years, and we aren't going to do that unless we start with Canada, something I have been saying for quite some time. This is going to make this more possible. Both of are going to benefit from enhanced security, and the way that we are going to get to more trade is to have this enhanced, more efficient security at the border.
Q: What about exit visas?
The reason that it is important to get the exit information, is for a whole variety of reasons that are important to Canada or to the United States. If someone has a six-month visa to come from some country into Canada, and they got to Canada in 2009, and they didn't leave Canada until 2011, well they have overstayed the visa, and so maybe the next time they apply for a visa that may be something that you might want to know. Or you have applied to become a permanent resident, and you've got a commitment that you stay in the country for a certain period of time. Well if you leave the country, that's something that the Canadian officials would want to know. The same is true on my side. This is a big win for both of us.
Q: Are there additional exit databases attached to that exit visa? Criminal records, immigration files?
Any information that you would get on an exit visa, you've already got when the person entered the country. So all you are finding out is the fact that they left. There is no additional personal information, other than the fact that they left the country on a given day.
Q: The regulation co-operation plan sets a later schedule. Is that because it will be much more difficult to put in place?
I think it speaks in large measure to the regulatory processes, which are technical, and notices have to be published, and comment has to be gotten in both countries. I think it has more to do with that. I think that, to your point about co-ordination and alignment, I think everybody was struggling for the right word here because we were all sensitive to the notion of sovereignty, and the idea that we were going to co-ordinate... We didn't want to raise any red flags.
We approached this to be as aggressive as we could, taking into account the legitimate concerns with respect to things like privacy and sovereignty, on both sides of the border. And the one thing that I do take issue with, is people that suggest we don't care about those things on my side of the border, that we don't care about sovereignty, or we don't care about privacy, or we don't care about individual rights, that these are things that we hold quite dear on my side of the border.
Q: Is part of the reasoning behind the trade component a desire to make the Canada/U.S. trade block more powerful in light of the booming Asian economies?
I'm not sure I would use the world powerful, in a sense, but more competitive, yes. We are in a very global economy. It is not just China, it is all over the world. We have to do as much as we can to make the economies of our two countries as competitive as we can make them. This is a part of it. It is reducing transaction costs. That is a big part of making yourselves competitive. I'm sure you have all heard my story about Cheerios. But the fortified recipe in Cheerios in the United States is different from the recipe in Canada. And people think, that's crazy. But it is expensive for the companies that have to make them.
Q: What does that mean for something like setting salt guidelines for products?
If Canada wanted to have a policy that was different from the policy of the United States, Canada would have a policy that was different. There is no obligation on either side. Going back to your point of why is it going to take longer. It is going to take longer because we are going to have to propose regulations that are consistent. We are going to have to get comment from the public, and the whole regulatory process will have to work. But nobody is suggesting here that Canada can't have low sodium requirements in its canned foods, if the United States doesn't want to do it, or vice versa.
Q: On a different topic, when will Omar Khadr leave Guantanamo and come to Canada?
There is a treaty between the United States and Canada with respect to prisoner exchange. There are a bunch of steps that have to be gone through. I believe, without knowing exactly today which of the steps we are in, I do know that we are in the midst of those steps and we are handling it like any other prisoner exchange. And when they complete the necessary steps we will return him, assuming that they complete the necessary steps. I can't give you a date. I don know that the request has been made by Khadr and his lawyers, and it is in the works.
Q: How will trans-national intelligence and investigations be done under the new plan?
There is a program which you guys are probably familiar with, called Ship Rider, which has been very successful. Canadian RCMP officers and U.S. coast guard officers are stationed together on a boat. They go on the waterways that divide the United States and Canada. They are specially trained and specially badged. What we are going to do is to take that concept, which has been very successful on water, and apply it to land. We are going to set up teams of specially badged, specially trained officers on both sides of the border, who are going to work together on investigations and on enforcement of things that are going back and forth across the border, and criminal organizations that move back and forth across the border. When the team is in the United States, U.S. law will apply. And when they are in Canada, Canadian law will apply. But they will work together.
Q: What kind of influence can the federal government exert to get the new Ambassador bridge expansion built?
I know that the reason why the Ambassador [Windsor-Detroit]bridge was not on the list, is because Michigan has to act first. Under our laws, the way our systems works, it requires, there are a portion of one of the steps in the process of building this infrastructure, for the state of Michigan to take the steps necessary in order to move it forward. I am hopeful that Michigan will act and they will act soon, and that we will get this behind us. My government believes very much that they need additional lanes of capacity, for both matters of trade and matters of national security. This is the most important piece of infrastructure between the United States and Canada. A quarter or a third...a lot.. of the trade between our two countries crosses that bridge. If something were to happen to it, that would be disastrous to the economies of both countries, so we are very much in favour of additional capacity, but Michigan's got to ask first.