Europe to Canada: Get your act together

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
Europe to Canada: Get your act together


DOUG SAUNDERS

source

October 4, 2008 at 8:19 AM EDT

BRUSSELS — The two presidents of the European Union will arrive in Montreal on the Friday after Canada's Oct. 14 federal election for a meeting that Prime Minister Stephen Harper has studiously avoided mentioning.
Nicolas Sarkozy will be there not as the President of France but as the acting president of the European Council, the top political office of the European Union. He will be joined by Jose Manuel Barroso, the president of the European Commission, the EU's top executive office. Thus, the two men who can be described as "the president of Europe" will be joined by whoever happens to be the prime minister of Canada.
That night, the three of them will announce the economic and political engagement of the two federations. They still haven't agreed on the name of the thing, though they are leaning toward Economic Partnership Agreement.
It will just be the preliminaries, but many people hope it will result, after a period of talks, in the consummation of a complex and potent marriage between Europe and Canada.
Related Articles

From the archives

Two weeks ago, when I revealed that there had been months of secret meetings, led by Quebec officials and involving serious engagement by Mr. Harper and Mr. Sarkozy, to arrange what some European officials call "deep integration" talks, the idea proved to be enormously popular with Canadians.
Prominent European leaders, such as Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson (who stepped down yesterday to join Gordon Brown's British government) and Mr. Barroso, tell me, through their senior aides, that they are willing to give the idea a shot, albeit while also courting other developed nations, such as Japan. Mr. Sarkozy, for his part, wants a Canadian deal to be one of the major accomplishments of his six-month turn in the European presidency.
Yet there is a very good chance it will not happen. If the talks collapse, as they did after a 2005 attempt at a much more modest investment deal, it won't be the result of Europe's failings. There is something very dysfunctional about Canada, many Europeans believe, that makes it hard to fit into the wider world. Any failure will be the direct result of the Canada that Stephen Harper has created.
"The problem with Canada," senior EU official involved in the talks told me, echoing a view that is heard in many of the EU member governments today, "is that it's not really one place. You think you're talking to Canada, and you make a deal, and then it turns out that someone else, in one of the provinces, has gone the other way. There's no unity."
The problem with Europe, Henry Kissinger once famously said in the seventies, is that it doesn't have a phone number. That's not true any more. Now, Brussels happily answers the phone for guys like Henry, but when Mr. Barroso tries to get on the horn with Canada, his secretary doesn't know whether to dial 613 or 450 or 403 or 604. Each line gives a different answer.
While the premiers of Quebec and Ontario both gave this deal their outspoken assent this week, the Europeans can't help noticing a major barrier to a deal that would harmonize European and Canadian standards and allow companies to do business with governments as if they were at home: Canada's provinces have never been able to get that kind of co-operation between each other. Note the tragic irony: Canada, a sovereign nation with 10 provinces and three territories, is considered fractious and lacking in unity by an organization that contains 27 independent nations and employs 3,000 full-time translators, including a woman who spends her days rendering Estonian into Maltese. But in many ways it's true: Bulgaria and Ireland play together better than Alberta and Newfoundland.
More then half the laws in any European country are EU laws; there's a near-total harmonization of standards, measures, government activities; there's complete freedom of movement, allowing companies to do business in any other member country as if it were their own. If the mayor of Lisbon wants to buy some new city buses and a company in Slovakia has the right stuff, then he has to treat it as if it was a Portuguese company. If a Polish plumber wants to set up shop in Bologna, the Italians have to give him a licence and recognize his qualifications.
Little of the above is true in Canada. A recent report by Industry Canada looked at half a dozen major studies and found that even though most of the interprovincial trade barriers have disappeared, it is still extremely difficult to do business across Canada: "Overlapping regulations between jurisdictions, multiple licensing requirements and local preferences in awarding government contracts [are] the biggest obstacles facing businesses."
That's exactly the stuff that Europe wants to make central to the deal ("They want the full Monty, if you know what I mean - the works," a French government official told me. "There's no point in doing a deal if we can't get full access to government services.")
But most alarming to the Europeans is that Mr. Harper does not appear to be moving Canada toward a Europe-friendly harmonization. Quite the contrary, he has spent his time in government promoting something he calls "open federalism," an approach he once likened to Belgium, a country that has just about collapsed under the weight of disunity. Today, he uses the term to suggest a shift of power to the provinces, and a removal of national standards in, say, labour laws or job training or medical care or housing standards.
The most significant manifestation of open federalism has been on carbon-emissions policy - an area that European leaders take extremely seriously. They see Canada as having an impossible hodgepodge of approaches: Quebec has a carbon-trading system, British Columbia a carbon tax; several provinces are trying to reach an agreement with several U.S. states on carbon taxes; some provinces, such as Alberta, have little more than a policy of increasing pollution.
During the past two years and eight months of Mr. Harper's reign, a period when Europe was breaking its collective back trying to find a way to make its member countries more united and harmonized, Canada was moving in the opposite direction. That, more than anything else, is threatening to keep us out of the world's most lucrative market.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
The European confusion issues with Canada are a direct result of NAFTA. We will not be allowed to improve trade with Europe. There is some desperate scrambling all over the western world to strike deals against the recession. The simple fact is we cannot get our act together because we don't have a made in Canada act to get together, we are no longer soverign.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
You think pissing off other regions of the world is the right thing to do don't you thomaska. You will learn differently and the world will watch you choke on the rejection and we'll record it and watch it over and over and over, the agony of Uncle Sam will be spectacular theatre. Every child will gleefully await the day that celebrates your destruction, every one of them will keep it holy all of thier lives, and for the centurys to come America will be remembered as something rotten and evil.:smile:
 

Avro

Time Out
Feb 12, 2007
7,815
65
48
55
Oshawa
You must be doing something right if you are pissing the Euroweenies off...

Not trying to piss them off, just trade growing pains. We are trying to find a new trading partner since the U.S. is going down the toilet.:lol:
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
29,793
11,123
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Europe to Canada: Get your act together

Here's a perfect example of "Canada needing to get its act together."

Imagine you're the Safety Supervisor and Compliance Officer for an international
transportation company, and close to half of your day is spend researching legislation
province to province, state to state, and internationally between the USA and Canada
with respect to the transport industry.

The USA does have some regional differences with respect to weight allowances and
permit rules, ect... but it is, as a whole amazingly unified by the DOT FMCSA and
with reasonable ease one can navigate through their legal system. Not so in Canada.
Canadian provinces (legislatively) are like ten independent little countries and the Federal
authority (Transport Canada) has rules and regulations buried in and among and attached
to the bottom of Acts in such a bizarre fashion in that they trump provincial rules half of
the time, but only half the time.

The average Scale Inspector anywhere in the USA knows more about his state rules and
the federal rules than Someone in Transport Canada (and located in Alberta) would know
about Alberta's provincial rules, and he'd have no idea (or a completely wrong idea) as to
the provincial rules in even their neighboring provinces as it's just such a cluster...it's bad.

Here's an example. Where in Canada is it illegal to drive while using a Cell phone? Does
it make a difference if you're in a private vehicle or a commercial vehicle? Does this second
question apply regardless of what province you're in? You'd think there would be one federal
rule about this so that everyone everywhere would know an immediate answer, and an
organized system so that everyone would know when the rules change.....but it's messy here.

I get a question about American legislation and can usually say, "Give me 20 minutes or so
and I'll have and answer for you." And it doesn't matter if it's a federal or state or state to state
question, I still can say with fair confidence that I'll have an answer before coffee time. If I get a
none provincial specific (and sometimes even a provincially specific question) and usually all I
can say is, "OK...I'll get back to you once I get and answer and verify that nothing else trumps
that answer." I might have an answer in half and hour, or half a day, or next week...it sucks.
This is an example of what the Europeans (from the outside looking in) are facing.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
Up until the mid 1900s, our major trading connections were with Europe. Great Britain, especially, kept Canada down, oppressed under the 'poor colonial' concept.

Since Canada has focussed on trade within North America, and over the Pacific, we have grown significantly.

I don't see any reason to cowtow to Europe - it's a region whose time is long past, despite what they may cling to.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
29,793
11,123
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Europe to Canada: Get your act together

It would be nice if we did simplify things for trade (or at least the transportation of that trade)
amongst our own provinces through. It's more of a nightmare than the average guy would
imagine. If I'm running something from Indiana to central Alberta, I'll keep a Leased Operator
in the USA until at least Saskatchewan to avoid conflicting (federal and provincial) laws in
Canada. Ontario is the absolute worst in that all those counties and townships are operated
like independent little kingdoms and all of them with individual rules (and their hands out). It
came about when the Ontario government "gave" the roads (and their maintenance) to all of
these little kingdoms.

We had the opportunity a while back to haul several Park Model homes (13ft wide) from
Northern Ontario into Alberta, and it would have taken 13 different permits to as many little
counties and townships just to get out of Ontario, and three more (one per province) to get
them into Alberta. Yeah....we just got them out of Indiana. Way simpler with less expensive
fuel for half the trip. Canada isn't even really transportation friendly even with itself.
 

einmensch

Electoral Member
Mar 1, 2008
937
14
18
Have you noticed that labels increasingly come in English, French and Spanish. The North American Union is coming. Harper is right in there. We are part of the USA and their fate is ours.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Actually more integration into the EU might be good for Canada if that ever occured. If we tell Quebec what to do, it comes across as paternatistic on the part of the Anglos, but if the standardization should come through multilateralism through a larger political union including France and other French-speaking areas, as well as the UK, both sides might be more willing to standardize North-Atlantic-wide.