Boyz In The 'Hood
Meeting right on schedule for the North American Leaders' summit and the protesters are lining right up alongside the summit organizers, intent on having their place and their say in the proceedings. And good luck to all. We'll need it. The North American Security and Prosperity Partnership has a robust and nice sound to it, but it's those devilish little details that has most of us more than a little concerned.
This is NATO carried to the next stage. We're talking economic integration of a manner we haven't yet quite seen. And from a purely Canadian perspective, given the foul play Canada has experienced on the part of U.S. Congressional decisions vis a vis Canadian interests we're not holding our breath that fairness will be the order of the day. It's the U.S. that calls the shots, and that's that. Just about.
Do we really want to fully integrate the Canadian economy with that of the United States? True, they're our biggest trading partner, always have been, always will be. But somehow we keep ending up with the short end of the stick. It's a stick that has been used as a cudgel too often. And sure, when the U.S. sneezes we get a cold: witness the sub-prime rate mortgage breakdown and how it's been affecting our stock exchange as well as the rest of the world's.
But this is following along the wishes of North America's business and political elites; making money has no borders, although governments cling to them, and so do their societies. We've got untold natural resources to rely upon as a country wealthy in geography, and we'd like to retain as much of it as we possibly can for our own careful use in perpetuity.
Security integration? Sounds good. Who are the major beneficiaries? What are the sacrifices, and upon whom will the greater burden of those sacrifices fall? Mmmmmee? asked that hesitant little representative? Wouldn't the citizens of the countries involved; the United States, Canada, Mexico, like to have their considered opinions sought, after due explanation of all the details?
But no: agreement, executive-to-executive, requires no legislative change, nor parliamentary involvement. How can this be!? wails the confused elector. This is the privilege of B I G business, of complicit government. Stand back.
The government of Canada has no problems with rapidly expanding Alberta's tarsands production. We get the environmental fall-out, the critical degradation of our atmosphere, and the U.S. gets our energy reserves exported south for their uninhibited use at favourable rates. Canada's Communications, Energy and Paperworkers union has produced a study underlining thousands of jobs lost here, migrating south.
Our trusty leaders are working toward a regulatory framework for harmonization. Sounds very friendly. The process may have the unpalatable result of weakening Canada's health, safety and environmental regulations and standards, to descend to the level enjoyed by Americans. One of whom, in desperation at the mounting uninsured health costs associated with treating his wife's incurable disease, hugged and kissed her and threw her off their balcony.
At the present time because of lack of harmonization in toxic substances some U.S. products are being withheld from sale in the Canadian market. A SPP committee is working diligently to 'resolve differences' in maximum pesticide residue limits. Canada has stricter limits than the U.S. in about 40% of commonly utilized pesticides. We don't need relaxation of allowable limits into Canada; we need to retain this 'trade barrier' and strengthen it!!
Because a Republican, rules-averse, corporate-loving administration in the United States is busy dismantling that country's consumer protection regulatory systems, there is no good reason why Canada should do likewise. Have harmonization reflect higher levels of consumer care and let the U.S. follow Canada's example. Mexico won't complain too much.
When President Felipe Calderon, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and President George W. Bush get together at Montebello they will most likely determine they will bypass the live video footage of the protest lobbying nearby for reason and fairness to prevail. They have that choice.
What choice do we have?
This is NATO carried to the next stage. We're talking economic integration of a manner we haven't yet quite seen. And from a purely Canadian perspective, given the foul play Canada has experienced on the part of U.S. Congressional decisions vis a vis Canadian interests we're not holding our breath that fairness will be the order of the day. It's the U.S. that calls the shots, and that's that. Just about.
Do we really want to fully integrate the Canadian economy with that of the United States? True, they're our biggest trading partner, always have been, always will be. But somehow we keep ending up with the short end of the stick. It's a stick that has been used as a cudgel too often. And sure, when the U.S. sneezes we get a cold: witness the sub-prime rate mortgage breakdown and how it's been affecting our stock exchange as well as the rest of the world's.
But this is following along the wishes of North America's business and political elites; making money has no borders, although governments cling to them, and so do their societies. We've got untold natural resources to rely upon as a country wealthy in geography, and we'd like to retain as much of it as we possibly can for our own careful use in perpetuity.
Security integration? Sounds good. Who are the major beneficiaries? What are the sacrifices, and upon whom will the greater burden of those sacrifices fall? Mmmmmee? asked that hesitant little representative? Wouldn't the citizens of the countries involved; the United States, Canada, Mexico, like to have their considered opinions sought, after due explanation of all the details?
But no: agreement, executive-to-executive, requires no legislative change, nor parliamentary involvement. How can this be!? wails the confused elector. This is the privilege of B I G business, of complicit government. Stand back.
The government of Canada has no problems with rapidly expanding Alberta's tarsands production. We get the environmental fall-out, the critical degradation of our atmosphere, and the U.S. gets our energy reserves exported south for their uninhibited use at favourable rates. Canada's Communications, Energy and Paperworkers union has produced a study underlining thousands of jobs lost here, migrating south.
Our trusty leaders are working toward a regulatory framework for harmonization. Sounds very friendly. The process may have the unpalatable result of weakening Canada's health, safety and environmental regulations and standards, to descend to the level enjoyed by Americans. One of whom, in desperation at the mounting uninsured health costs associated with treating his wife's incurable disease, hugged and kissed her and threw her off their balcony.
At the present time because of lack of harmonization in toxic substances some U.S. products are being withheld from sale in the Canadian market. A SPP committee is working diligently to 'resolve differences' in maximum pesticide residue limits. Canada has stricter limits than the U.S. in about 40% of commonly utilized pesticides. We don't need relaxation of allowable limits into Canada; we need to retain this 'trade barrier' and strengthen it!!
Because a Republican, rules-averse, corporate-loving administration in the United States is busy dismantling that country's consumer protection regulatory systems, there is no good reason why Canada should do likewise. Have harmonization reflect higher levels of consumer care and let the U.S. follow Canada's example. Mexico won't complain too much.
When President Felipe Calderon, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and President George W. Bush get together at Montebello they will most likely determine they will bypass the live video footage of the protest lobbying nearby for reason and fairness to prevail. They have that choice.
What choice do we have?
posted by Pieface | 1:56 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home