Skip to main content

Opinion From the comments: From supply management to the changed name, readers discuss new NAFTA deal

Today’s comments were selected from Globe stories reporting the details of the new Nafta deal, renamed United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Hundreds of comments have been posted by readers since news of the agreement was reported Sunday night. Below are a few highlights.

U.S. President Donald Trump announces the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) as U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross looks on during a news conference in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, U.S., October 1, 2018. REUTERS/Leah Millis

LEAH MILLIS/Reuters

From Canada, U.S. reach tentative NAFTA deal; Trump approves pact by Robert Fife and Adrian Morrow

Considering the strong position the U.S. was negotiating from, Canada did okay. I commend the patience and fortitude if the Canadian team. - grantp

Story continues below advertisement

Sounds like a deal just like the old deal except for a small concession on dairy (and I intend to try to source my milk and cheese from local dairies through specialty food shops whenever possible.) But if the Chapter 19 is intact and we keep the cultural exemptions, it’s fine, and better to sign on than risk a no-deal situation. Sounds like the biggest change is the name, USMCA, making it sound like we just joined the United States Marine Corps Association. If at worst it appeals to Trump’s vanity and at best it keeps most of the old deal intact, then I would say, our negotiators did a pretty good job. - WendyStone

People need to understand that section 232 is directly under Presidential control because it is about "National Security". This is the loophole which allowed Trump to impose Steel and Aluminum tariffs without Congressional oversight (all trade decisions must normally pass Congress).

Obviously Trump's application of National Security concerns against Canada was ludicrous and insulting. But this cannot be solved via a trade deal. It is up to Congress to remove Executive Power to do this without Congressional oversight. I doubt this will happen even though many in the GOP thought that imposing National Security tariffs on Canada was inappropriate.

This is a BIG blind spot in these negotiations because it will rely upon the "Good will" of Trump to remove them. And of course, if he had good will, he never would have imposed them. So the risk remains, but there was no way around it because Section 232 is up to the President right now and cannot be eliminated via a Trade deal. - Not the Alliance

From NAFTA deal a heavy price for Canada’s dairy farmers by Barrie McKenna and Eric Atkins

It seems that this should be a wake up call for the dairy industry in Canada. Times are a changing and they had best prepare. The only reason the quota system still exists is because of political pressures. The average Canadian would like lower prices and more choice. Best get your ducks in a row. You have little sympathy outside of your inner circle of friends. - M_G

In response to M_G:

Story continues below advertisement

What you fail to mention is that all US taxpayers pay for cheaper milk through massive farm subsidies. Something that we do not do in Canada. So in fact the US government supports its dairy overproduction through subsidies to farmers and then they want to dump all of this over production all over the world. - T. Cloz

Supply management is good for the dwindling number of Canadian dairy farmers. The price, though, is borne by the Canadian consumer. Although high quality product is a good outcome, high price is not the way to achieve it. The consumer also bears the exorbitant price of good imported dairy product due to tariffs. Why be satisfied with pale imitations of famous cheeses from around the world when Canadians could enjoy the original version at a competitive price?

As much as the image of the small dairy farmer is the stuff of legend, the number of producers has fallen significantly since supply management was introduced. A small number of producers holds the consumer hostage to an arrangement that benefits only the producers. We live with price fluctuations in almost every category of agricultural produce. Why should dairy, poultry and eggs be any different? The government of Canada is taking a small step toward making dairy production subject to the preference of consumers by allowing access to the domestic market by foreign producers. This is long overdue. - canuckdaddy

I continue to be baffled by people who have a problem with farmers making a decent living, and therefore supporting their rural communities. Your family food budget isn’t being destroyed by milk. - JMBee1

From Mexico may have lost most with new NAFTA deal, but calls it a win by Stephanie Nolen

Most significantly, Mexico lost the world's respect by betraying Canada in the course of submitting to Trump. - Conservative for Life

Story continues below advertisement

In response to Conservative for Life:

Wrong. If you were paying attention, you would know that The Globe and Mail’s own reporters broke the story that it was Canada, in the early stages of the negotiations last spring, who betrayed Mexico by attempting to ink a quick two-party deal with the U.S. That foray by Canada, rejected by the U.S. at the time, broke the stated agreement that neither country (Canada or Mexico) would go it alone with the U.S. Not surprisingly, later in the summer, Canada found itself watching as Mexico and the U.S. did a tango together, and reached a deal. Of course, Trump tried to divide and conquer. But, as reported by The Globe and Mail, it was Canada who initially betrayed Mexico - PHILCO3

From the Comments is a new feature designed to highlight interesting and thoughtful contributions from our readers. Some comments have been edited for clarity. Everyone can read the comments but only subscribers will be able to contribute. Thank you to everyone furthering debate across our site.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter