Comments on: Wednesday Night #1329 - SPP with Guy Stanley OWN

By: Diana Thébaud Nicholson

Diana Thébaud Nicholson — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:25:18 +0000

Bill for Montebello summit: $13.6M
Doesn’t include RCMP costs. Leaders of Canada, U.S. and Mexico feasted on $95 meals of caribou, duck and quail
PHIL COUVRETTE, Canwest News Service
Last August’s Montebello summit cost at least $13.6 million, according to documents obtained by Canwest News Service, and that doesn’t include the RCMP’s costs, which will likely be the biggest bill of all.
While various government departments and police forces are still tabulating their expenses, the Department of Foreign Affairs - the lead agency for the meeting between leaders of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico - has spent about $3 million and counting, according to receipts obtained by Canwest News Service.
The Security and Prosperity Partnership summit lived up to its name, at least cost-wise.

By: Diana Thébaud Nicholson

Diana Thébaud Nicholson — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 17:09:18 +0000

August 27
“Like badly rehearsed actors in a comic opera, three burly Sûreté du Québec officers were unmasked last week trying to pass themselves off as protesters during the North American government leaders’ summit meeting in Montebello.
For men whose assignment apparently was to blend with the crowd and be on the lookout for dangerous or violent protesters, the police officers appear to have gone badly astray.
First, they were dressed in combat fatigues and facemasks, looking for all the world like extras in a Rambo movie. The relatively low numbers of actual protesters at this meeting generally stuck to conventional attire, including in some cases business suits.”
Gazette editorial

By: Diana Thébaud Nicholson

Diana Thébaud Nicholson — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 16:32:58 +0000

“Montebello meltdown, based on an interview with Dr. Robert A. Pastor of American University, neatly resumes the realities of SPP:
“The federal authorities in both Canada and the United States have simply not gotten their acts together on the big picture issues. One of Pastor’s great concerns is that since NAFTA, trade has increased considerably. But the cost of the goods traded has risen instead of fallen, mostly, he says, due to the lack of a renewed transport grid that is so outdated that it actually makes the costs of further expansion of North-South trade prohibitive.
There are vital issues on the agenda of North American co-operation. These include easing rules on legitimate travel and immigration, eliminating rules-of-origin with a customs union, preventing monopoly practices in an enlarged North American market while reducing unnecessary regulations, and developing more effective procedures to facilitate co-operation on Canadian job protection. Sadly, these critical questions are not yet on the agenda. When they get there they must be debated in the open.”

By: Diana Thébaud Nicholson

Diana Thébaud Nicholson — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:58:09 +0000

MONTEBELLO: PM MEETS BUSH DESPITE PROTESTS
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper met U.S. President George W. Bush at Montebello, QC, ….They were later joined by Mexico’s President Felipe Calderon, who said he’ll have to return home on Tuesday instead of on Wednesday to deal with the emergency caused by Hurricane Dean, which is nearing Yucatan. The three leaders’ main purpose is to discuss their countries’ North American Security and Prosperity Partnership.
Canadian officials revealed that Mr. Bush and Mr. Harper discussed border issues, trade and Canada’s sovereignty claim over the Arctic. During the weekend, former U.S. Ambassador Paul Cellucci said it would make sense for the U.S. to recognize that claim. The president did not reverse the longstanding U.S. contention that Canada has sovereignty over the Arctic islands but that the waterways around them are international. RCI

By: Diana Thébaud Nicholson

Diana Thébaud Nicholson — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:37:13 +0000

In the interest of balance, we offer the more extreme view:
“For another informative piece written from a very different perspective you might find the following of interest, providing a wider and problematical not to say worrisome context. The SPP is discussed about half way down the page.
Before that though, you and David may be interested in a video from Lou Dobbs on CNN about “North American Union”
There also are some interesting items at August Review including
” Toward a North American Union: The global elite, through the direct operations of President George Bush and his Administration, are creating a North American Union that will combine Canada, Mexico and the U.S. into a superstate called the North American Union…. ”
Canada’s Sovereignty in Jeopardy: the Militarization of North America By Michel Chossudovsky”
David Mitchell OWN

By: Diana Thébaud Nicholson

Diana Thébaud Nicholson — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:27:55 +0000

A week ago, 13 August, there was also a conference at the Hudson Institute featuring a paper on SPP by Greg Anderson and Chris Sands, “Negotiating North America: The Security and Prosperity Partnership.” The paper and the panels were relatively uneventful, but they were also something that helps keep SPP in perspective. Hudson website should have the paper for any of your Wednesday Night participants who are interested.
David Jones OWN

By: Guy Stanley

Guy Stanley — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 18:28:21 +0000

Always a bad idea to let yourself be defined by your opponents. D’Aquino’s piece is on target–how else does a country like Canada manage to make its huge neighbour a tad more predictable, especially when (1) its administration has such a peculiar view of the world and (2) the threat of another terrorist attack is real? Another aspect of this is the consequence of a single market in so many commodities–producers on both sides of the border want access to the same array of inputs, even chemical ones. So “harmonization” is also about managing a single market for controlled substances across 3 jurisdictions.
Since all 3 governments regulate “by reference” to statutes, as long as the changes don’t break the boundaries of the relevant laws, the reg changes have only to be announced in Gazettes or federal registers–official publications of rule changes. It’s only the working groups that get involved at that level, however. The Heads of NAFTA governments are supposed to consult regularly anyway (Chapter 20 of NAFTA) to ensure the agreement is continuing to function as it should. Anyone who studies NAFTA is aware of its flaws as a design for what has emerged from it, namely a single North American market in most of what the 3 countries make. But there is no mechanism for upgrading continental infrastructure, reducing inadvertent trade barriers caused by minor rule differences, and now on top of that addressing security concerns. The energy stuff is mainly about Alberta trying to lock in US markets. Water management is not touched in NAFTA but recent concerns about unilateral action in Great Lakes tributaries need addressing and the US has been in violation of its treaty with Mexico over water flows for some time. As the Greens point out, no country in NAFTA is a “water surplus” country.The US is also outside the UN mechanism for
resolving international territorial disputes…so lots of reason for the leaders to talk.
Why not more publicity? The same hostile crowd raised the same objections about the WTO meetings and even managed to shut them down to some extent. Now global trade liberalization has ground to a halt and Doha is moribund if not yet a corpse. Result: even more subsidies for rich western farmers and less hope for raising the welfare of poor countries through trade-led
growth. It’s clear that Executive Branches of all 3 governments have not learned the lesson of these WTO disasters–they definitely should never create the impression they are conspiring against their electorates.Many of those who support the SPP process would welcome a debate about the future of North America as an economic partnership. But that debate would have to be much more far reaching than the constrained, relatively technocratic SPP.