"NAFTA? We Don't Need No Stink'n NAFTA!"

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,207
8,048
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
U.S. stimulus plan's 'protectionist' clause concerns Harper

Andrew Mayeda and Sheldon Alberts, Canwest News Service Published: Thursday, January 29, 2009
Source: U.S. stimulus plan's 'protectionist' clause concerns Harper
Prime Minister Stephen Harper expressed serious concern Thursday over a provision of the U.S. stimulus bill that would require infrastructure projects to use American steel, putting Canada on the edge of its first trade dispute with the United States since Barack Obama was inaugurated.

The "Buy American" clause would ban the use of most foreign iron and steel from infrastructure projects funded under the US$819-billion stimulus bill, which passed the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday.

Thursday, Mr. Harper added Canada's name to the growing list of U.S. trade partners, from the European Union to Australia, who are seeking to overturn the provision.

"This is obviously a serious matter and a serious concern to us," Mr. Harper told the House of Commons, adding that he had spoken about the matter with Canada's ambassador to the U.S., Michael Wilson.

"I know that countries around the world are expressing grave concern about some of these measures, that go against not just the obligations of the United States, but frankly, the spirit of our G20 discussions," the prime minister added.

"We will be having these discussions with our friends in the United States, and we expect the United States to respect its international obligations."

Mr. Harper's comments came a day after he confirmed that the U.S. president will visit Canada on Feb. 19. The Prime Minister is now expected to raise the Buy American provision during their first meeting.

But given the rush in Washington to pass the stimulus bill -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she would like Congress to pass the bill early next month -- Canadian diplomats have already begun a concerted lobbying effort to convince U.S. politicians to change their minds.

Trade Minister Stockwell Day, on his way to Davos, Switzerland, today for the World Economic Forum, said he would raise the matter with senior U.S. trade officials, as well as Pascal Lamy, head of the World Trade Organization.

Mr. Day said the clause appeared to violate the free-trade principles of the WTO, of which the United States is a member, as well as the North American Free Trade Agreement. But he said it is too early to say if Canada will launch any formal complaint.

"We respect every country's autonomy when it comes to passing legislation," Mr. Day said in an interview. "At this time we're using all the diplomatic channels that are available."

Mr. Obama's successful campaign for president included repeated vows to reopen the North American Free Trade Agreement and make changes that would protect American jobs.

The steel provision is reminiscent of the Buy American Act passed by Congress amid the depths of the Great Depression. Passed in 1933, it required the U.S. government to favour made-in-America products when making purchases.
Mr. Day warned the U.S. against falling back on trade barriers as a means of protecting itself against the recession.

"History shows clearly that you can't fall back into protectionist measures. That happened in the 1930s and what could have been a bad one or two-year recession turned into, as we know, the Great Depression."

The stimulus package has also triggered a wave of anxiety among Canadian and U.S. companies that do extensive cross-border business.

"We've very concerned," said Scotty Greenwood, executive director of the Canadian-American Business Council, which lobbies on behalf of companies with interests in both countries.

The economic stimulus bill passed by the House of Representatives is "not well thought out" because it does not recognize how integrated the Canadian and U.S. economies have become.

"It's a big mistake with Canada because it doesn't fundamentally recognize the way we do business," Mr. Greenwood said.

The provisions banning foreign steel and iron from being used in any infrastructure project could deal a serious blow to the $13 billion Canadian steel industry, which exports about 40% of its product to the U.S.

But of potentially more concern is the Senate version of the bill --which is still being debated and currently includes language to require only American-made equipment and goods be used on projects created by the stimulus.

"U.S. policy-makers need to be better educated," said Mr. Greenwood, whose group is now focusing its efforts on getting the Senate to amend its legislation. "For the purposes of the domestic market in the U.S., it's useful for Canada to be considered domestic."

The Senate is expected to vote next week on its version of the stimulus bill. At that point, the Senate and House would meet in "conference" negotiations to reconcile the two pieces of legislation, which could be Canada's last chance to have the bill altered.

Mr. Obama technically has the authority to veto the bill, but is under intense pressure to get his recovery package through Congress as soon as possible.
Canwest News Service
_______________________
 

Stretch

House Member
Feb 16, 2003
3,924
19
38
Australia
U.S. stimulus plan's 'protectionist' clause concerns Harper

Andrew Mayeda and Sheldon Alberts, Canwest News Service Published: Thursday, January 29, 2009
Source: U.S. stimulus plan's 'protectionist' clause concerns Harper
Prime Minister Stephen Harper expressed serious concern Thursday over a provision of the U.S. stimulus bill that would require infrastructure projects to use American steel, putting Canada on the edge of its first trade dispute with the United States since Barack Obama was inaugurated.

The "Buy American" clause would ban the use of most foreign iron and steel from infrastructure projects funded under the US$819-billion stimulus bill, which passed the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday.

Thursday, Mr. Harper added Canada's name to the growing list of U.S. trade partners, from the European Union to Australia, who are seeking to overturn the provision.

"This is obviously a serious matter and a serious concern to us," Mr. Harper told the House of Commons, adding that he had spoken about the matter with Canada's ambassador to the U.S., Michael Wilson.

"I know that countries around the world are expressing grave concern about some of these measures, that go against not just the obligations of the United States, but frankly, the spirit of our G20 discussions," the prime minister added.

"We will be having these discussions with our friends in the United States, and we expect the United States to respect its international obligations."

Mr. Harper's comments came a day after he confirmed that the U.S. president will visit Canada on Feb. 19. The Prime Minister is now expected to raise the Buy American provision during their first meeting.

But given the rush in Washington to pass the stimulus bill -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she would like Congress to pass the bill early next month -- Canadian diplomats have already begun a concerted lobbying effort to convince U.S. politicians to change their minds.

Trade Minister Stockwell Day, on his way to Davos, Switzerland, today for the World Economic Forum, said he would raise the matter with senior U.S. trade officials, as well as Pascal Lamy, head of the World Trade Organization.

Mr. Day said the clause appeared to violate the free-trade principles of the WTO, of which the United States is a member, as well as the North American Free Trade Agreement. But he said it is too early to say if Canada will launch any formal complaint.

"We respect every country's autonomy when it comes to passing legislation," Mr. Day said in an interview. "At this time we're using all the diplomatic channels that are available."

Mr. Obama's successful campaign for president included repeated vows to reopen the North American Free Trade Agreement and make changes that would protect American jobs.

The steel provision is reminiscent of the Buy American Act passed by Congress amid the depths of the Great Depression. Passed in 1933, it required the U.S. government to favour made-in-America products when making purchases.
Mr. Day warned the U.S. against falling back on trade barriers as a means of protecting itself against the recession.

"History shows clearly that you can't fall back into protectionist measures. That happened in the 1930s and what could have been a bad one or two-year recession turned into, as we know, the Great Depression."

The stimulus package has also triggered a wave of anxiety among Canadian and U.S. companies that do extensive cross-border business.

"We've very concerned," said Scotty Greenwood, executive director of the Canadian-American Business Council, which lobbies on behalf of companies with interests in both countries.

The economic stimulus bill passed by the House of Representatives is "not well thought out" because it does not recognize how integrated the Canadian and U.S. economies have become.

"It's a big mistake with Canada because it doesn't fundamentally recognize the way we do business," Mr. Greenwood said.

The provisions banning foreign steel and iron from being used in any infrastructure project could deal a serious blow to the $13 billion Canadian steel industry, which exports about 40% of its product to the U.S.

But of potentially more concern is the Senate version of the bill --which is still being debated and currently includes language to require only American-made equipment and goods be used on projects created by the stimulus.

"U.S. policy-makers need to be better educated," said Mr. Greenwood, whose group is now focusing its efforts on getting the Senate to amend its legislation. "For the purposes of the domestic market in the U.S., it's useful for Canada to be considered domestic."

The Senate is expected to vote next week on its version of the stimulus bill. At that point, the Senate and House would meet in "conference" negotiations to reconcile the two pieces of legislation, which could be Canada's last chance to have the bill altered.

Mr. Obama technically has the authority to veto the bill, but is under intense pressure to get his recovery package through Congress as soon as possible.
Canwest News Service
_______________________


thats the problem with putting all of ones eggs in the one basket.....ya get screwed!
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,207
8,048
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
I seem to dimly remember some impressively significant quotes from the "Three
Amigo's" Conference (Harper-Bush-Calderon) back during the Democrats race where
Barrack and Hillary where both talking about retooling NAFTA.

The quotes I'm thinking of came from Harper at that time....8O
 
Last edited:

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
Harper could start some infrastructre projects in Canada and do the same. Twin the Port Mann bridge in the Fraser Valley, rebuild deterioriating Quebec bridges/overpasses, replace the Lions Gate in Vancouver, the Patullo in New Westminster (just examples)..instead of dropping money into make-work projects in parks that won't have nearly the same effects.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,207
8,048
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Source: North American Union: Three Amigos Less One? April 23, 2008

If U.S. presidential candidates Senators Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama want to dabble with a renegotiated North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), they’ll find Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper standing in their way.

Harper issued a warning yesterday to future U.S. leaders out to renegotiate the North American free-trade Agreement (NAFTA), warning them that Canada would drive a tougher bargain because of its position as America’s biggest energy supplier.

Harper’s comments throw cold water on NAFTA attacks from wanabees Clinton and Obama, and a monkey wrench at the long suspected NAU. His comments came at the end of a meeting with U.S. President George W. Bush and Mexican President Felipe Calderon, where the three leaders were defending NAFTA against the Clinton Barrack attacks.

Asked whether it might not be a bad idea to rethink certain aspects of the deal, Mr. Harper said he was ready for any eventuality, but warned that Canada was in a stronger position than when the Canada-U.S. free trade agreement was negotiated during the 1980s.

“We are a secure, stable (energy) supplier. That is of critical importance to the future of the United States,” Mr. Harper told reporters at the end of the North American leaders’ summit known as the Three Amigos. “If we have to look at this kind of an option, I think, quite frankly, we’d be in an even stronger position now than we were 20 years ago, and we’ll be in a stronger position in the future.” (http://www.theglobeandmail.com, April 23, 2008).

“Mr. Harper said he did not want to reopen NAFTA, but he is not the first Canadian politician to link opening the free-trade deal and energy. International Trade Minister David Emerson did so in February after Mr. Barrack and Ms. Clinton criticized NAFTA. The agreement prohibits Canada from cutting oil exports to the United States during worldwide shortages unless supplies are also cut in Canada.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,207
8,048
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Harper could start some infrastructre projects in Canada and do the same. Twin the Port Mann bridge in the Fraser Valley, rebuild deterioriating Quebec bridges/overpasses, replace the Lions Gate in Vancouver, the Patullo in New Westminster (just examples)..instead of dropping money into make-work projects in parks that won't have nearly the same effects.


All good ideas....or a pipeline straight West to the coast, and one East to
Eastern Canada, not crossing into the USA. That would put people to work
and it could be done with Canadian Steel, to ship Canadian oil. Power lines
and the supporting network could be built East-West from Quebec to move
Quebec's excess Hydro-power East-West instead of South. That would put
people to work. America could smelt their Only American Steel with
firewood (American firewood, I guess). All of my Ideas would violate
NAFTA though. We wouldn't want to do that to OUR trade partner.
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
What did we ever do before NAFTA? Wern't we actually better off?

At least when something happened to the US or Mexico before NAFTA we were never affected as much.

Abolish NAFTA, start trading with other countries.... it's time to cover our own ass for once.
 

Northboy

Electoral Member
I'm afraid its time to get up off the couch and build some inter regional trade programs, a market prefernece for Canadian made and a market preference for renewable.

I was afraid Obama was going to go this route, but if you owed almost all the value in the world, you might do the same.

On top of this China's message out of Davos is that the best thing they can do for the world is to maintain their growth, not help support third world countries' development plans, in other words- keep buying our crap and we'll be over to grind you down on your resources soon, as soon as you're desparate.

The Global Free Trade wet dream is dead, actually it was just a myth for the investment industry all along.

New mantra: Tit for Tat, Brother, tit for tat.

We used to call it reciprocity and it used to be a foundation of trade....
 
Last edited:

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,207
8,048
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Prax....this doesn't just violate NAFTA, but also the G20 & the WTO rules....
Obama has only been in power for less than two weeks, and out comes this?
Remember the flap when one of Obama's cronies leaked that the retooling
NAFTA talk wasn't to be taken seriously by Canada...it was just lip service
to buy votes while pacifying Ohio's unionized manufacturing workers? This is
the tip of an iceberg that needs to be nipped in the bud, and very, very quickly.
 

Northboy

Electoral Member
All good ideas....or a pipeline straight West to the coast, and one East to
Eastern Canada, not crossing into the USA. That would put people to work
and it could be done with Canadian Steel, to ship Canadian oil. Power lines
and the supporting network could be built East-West from Quebec to move
Quebec's excess Hydro-power East-West instead of South. That would put
people to work. America could smelt their Only American Steel with
firewood (American firewood, I guess). All of my Ideas would violate
NAFTA though. We wouldn't want to do that to OUR trade partner.


I agree good projects, but we've also got to follow though on things that are currently on the ground like this CNR debacle where we built a new port in BC and an intermodal port in Prince George, but the trains will not stop on any schedule, so local business can't use them.

CNR (an American owned company) and their Chinese partners basically tell people who complain to get stuffed. We've got to get this stuff fixed once and for all.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,207
8,048
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Source: washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines

'Buy American' Rider Sparks Trade Debate

Proviso Limits Steel, Iron From Abroad

Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 29, 2009; Page A01
The stimulus bill passed by the House last night contains a controversial provision that would mostly bar foreign steel and iron from the infrastructure projects laid out by the $819 billion economic package.

A Senate version, yet to be acted upon, goes further, requiring, with few exceptions, that all stimulus-funded projects use only American-made equipment and goods.

Proponents of expanding the "Buy American" provisions enacted during the Great Depression, including steel and iron manufacturers and labor unions, argue that it is the only way to ensure that the stimulus creates jobs at home and not overseas.
Opponents, including some of the biggest blue-chip names in American industry, say it amounts to a declaration of war against free trade. That, they say, could spark retaliation from abroad against U.S. companies and exacerbate the global financial crisis.

The provisions also confront President Obama with his first test on trade policy. He must weigh the potential consequences of U.S. protectionism against the appealing slogan of "Buy American" and the jobs argument.

The administration has not addressed the issue publicly, and sources close to the issue said it appears that a response is still being formulated.

"We're reviewing the Buy American plan proposal, and we are committed to a plan that will save or create at least 3 million jobs including jobs in manufacturing," White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.

The proposals are meant to regenerate heavy manufacturing jobs in the United States by forcing government contractors to use domestic materials and equipment, even if they are more expensive. Yet U.S. industrial giants including Caterpillar, General Electric and the domestic aerospace industry are emerging as strong opponents.

The measures, they argue, could violate trade deals the United States has signed in recent years, including an agreement on expanding access to government procurements reached through the World Trade Organization. But most damaging, critics say, would be the "protectionist message" attached to imposing such barriers on foreign companies.

Nations including China and many in Europe are preparing to spend billions of dollars of taxpayer money on stimulus projects. American companies are angling for a piece of those pies, and retaliatory measures against U.S. companies, executives argue, could significantly complicate those efforts. This week, a European Commission spokesman threatened countermeasures if the Buy American provisions are approved.

"There is no company that is going to benefit more from the stimulus package than Caterpillar, but I am telling you that by embracing Buy American you are undermining our ability to export U.S. produced products overseas," said Bill Lane, government affairs director for Caterpillar in Washington. More than half of Caterpillar's sales -- including big-ticket items like construction cranes and land movers -- are sold overseas.

"Any student of history will tell you that one of the most significant mistakes of the 1930s is when the U.S. embraced protectionism," Lane said. "It had a cascading effect that ground world trade almost to a halt, and turned a one-year recession into the Great Depression."

There are early signs that nations are putting up trade barriers to protect domestic companies as the global downturn worsens. Despite promises offered during a major economic summit in November to refrain from taking such measures, countries from France to Indonesia have done so.

That, some argue, may be reason enough for the United States to follow suit. But in recent decades, the United States has stood out as the global champion of free trade; some analysts fear a move by Congress to restrict foreign companies from stimulus spending would mark an important shift away from that philosophy.

Supporters say expanded Buy American provisions could help ensure that the treasure trove of government contracts for new highways, schools, bridges and energy grids creates jobs at home instead of abroad. They note that much of the tax rebate checks that went out last year to stimulate the economy went to Chinese-made televisions and Korean-made refrigerators.

Until the global economy turned critical in the second half of last year, the domestic steel industry, for instance, was operating at near capacity and steel prices were climbing sky-high. Now, U.S. unemployment is soaring.

Factories in some top steel-producing states -- including Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Alabama -- are running at 45 percent capacity, with 40 percent of their workforce on furlough, or about 25,000 people, according to United Steelworkers union. Ensuring that U.S. steel and iron do not have to compete with, say, Chinese steel, for stimulus projects, industry officials say, could help get those workers back on the assembly line.

"What we're already seeing is that demand is going down, but imports of Chinese finished steel is going up because they are subsidizing it," said Thomas Gibson, president of the industry-funded American Iron and Steel Institute. "What we're saying is that this is a stimulus package to promote American jobs. We ought to maximize every dollar in that bill toward that end. If you were building a bridge in West Virginia, you wouldn't bring in German workers to do it. Materials should be no different."

Congress enacted the Buy American Act in 1933, establishing preferences for U.S.-made products in government contracts. In 1982, those preferences were made more strict for transportation and highway projects, although waivers have been granted.

The plans being considered by Congress, however, would greatly amplify and expand existing preferences for U.S. companies. The provision passed last night was introduced by Rep. Peter J. Visclosky (D-Ind.) and had won unanimous bipartisan support in committee. Among the few exceptions, use of U.S. steel or iron would need to drive up the cost of a project by 25 percent in order to allow a foreign substitute -- far more rigorous than current regulations. The House bill also contained a stipulation that the uniforms and other textiles used by the Transportation Security Administration be 100 percent American-made.

In the Senate, Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), is proposing a far broader measure that would exclude most foreign-made manufactured goods, again, with a few exceptions. In an interview Visclosky said he would be inclined to accept the broader Senate proposal as the two houses seek to compromise on the final language of the bill.

It's not protectionism, Dorgan said. Citing the massive U.S. trade deficit, he added, "and it's pretty hard for anyone to look at our trade situation and suggest that we are being unfair."
_____________________________
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Naw, you watch, Harper will bend over backwards for whatever the US wants..... frig if he was PM a couple of years earlier, we'd be in Iraq today.

That's the Conservative way. Sell Canada to the USA. Make big money. Run real fast. The great unwashed can just kiss my a ... er ... heiney....
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Naw, you watch, Harper will bend over backwards for whatever the US wants..... frig if he was PM a couple of years earlier, we'd be in Iraq today.

We are in Iraq today and we were in on the planning and provisioning and supported the execution and we continue to support the executioners one-hundred percent.
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
We are in Iraq today and we were in on the planning and provisioning and supported the execution and we continue to support the executioners one-hundred percent.

I more meant that we're not in Iraq like we are in Afghanistan, with thousands of troops over there. I'm aware of the few odd troops and officers we have hanging around there, and although I don't believe they should be there period, if Harper was PM at the time of the decision, we'd probably have more troops over seas and a lot more deaths coming home then we do now.

Harper is an American wannabe who would be more willing to sell us out as much as he can like some adopted child he never wanted or cared about.
 

Said1

Hubba Hubba
Apr 18, 2005
5,336
66
48
51
Das Kapital
Does the US even have any steel producers big enough to provide materials for planned projects? I don't think so.

In any event, Obama is probably going to 'fast track' things through congress, which tends to turn out bad - or has authority been granted, I'm a little behind in the current events dept.

NAFTA and the WTO also do not address non-tariff trade barriers (even though the effect is the same), and they are permitted in certain circumstances.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,207
8,048
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Cancel those army trucks and contract with a Canadian industry


I too was thinking the same thing Wolf. Don't we have C17's on order (the
replacement for the C130's)? We might not be needing those C17's. I hear
Russia makes some very large Transports also...


Here's Harpers words from April of last year:

“We are a secure, stable (energy) supplier. That is of critical importance to the future of the United States,” Mr. Harper told reporters at the end of the North American leaders’ summit known as the Three Amigos. “If we have to look at this kind of an option, I think, quite frankly, we’d be in an even stronger position now than we were 20 years ago, and we’ll be in a stronger position in the future.”
8O

With respect to the retooling NAFTA posturing by Mr. Obama & Mrs. Clinton at that time.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
I more meant that we're not in Iraq like we are in Afghanistan, with thousands of troops over there. I'm aware of the few odd troops and officers we have hanging around there, and although I don't believe they should be there period, if Harper was PM at the time of the decision, we'd probably have more troops over seas and a lot more deaths coming home then we do now.

Harper is an American wannabe who would be more willing to sell us out as much as he can like some adopted child he never wanted or cared about.

The war on terror is broad and it will last for many decades as you no doubt heard from the pricks who started and continue to run it according to plan its being widened right now, there is very little chance that we will not be over there in ten to one hundred the numbers in the near future. Total war is the goal, no one will be spared to save the wealthy.