On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 8:13 PM, ken hanly <northsunm at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Many Canadians would be quite happy to re-open NAFTA
> as Obama and Clinton suggest. Laxer gives some of the
> reasons for doing so.
>
> http://www.jameslaxer.com/blog.html
>
> Obama and Clinton Have a Point: Let's Take a Hard Look
> at NAFTA
>
> Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have been squabbling
> over which of them is more serious about standing up
> to Canada on the shortcomings of the North American
> Free Trade Agreement. In her last ditch effort to
> seize victory from the jaws of defeat in Ohio (we'll
> know the result tonight), Clinton has been accusing
> Obama of talking tough to hard hit workers while
> reassuring Ottawa that he's only kidding.
>
> Neither of these candidates is remotely pro-Canadian.
> As a border state senator, Hillary Clinton has been
> happy to bash Canada for its supposedly lax security
> whenever that suits her. Not that we should be
> surprised that the Democratic front runners could care
> less about Canada. That's normal, despite the
> dewy-eyed proclivity of some Canadians to seek
> salvation from American politicians.
>
> We ought to be thankful though to Obama and Clinton
> for insisting on the renegotiation of NAFTA if either
> of them reaches the White House.
>
> Canadians have pressing reasons for taking a hard look
> at NAFTA.
>
> NAFTA and its predecessor, the Canada-U.S. Free Trade
> Agreement were negotiated at a time when petroleum
> prices were much lower than today and the world was
> much less queasy about petroleum supply than it is
> now.
>
> When the Mulroney Conservatives negotiated the free
> trade deals, one of their major objectives was to
> ensure that no Canadian government could ever again
> pursue a petroleum policy that did not suit the oil
> companies, the Conservative government in Alberta and
> the U.S. administration in Washington. And while they
> failed miserably at gaining secure access for Canadian
> exports to the U.S. (witness softwood lumber), they
> succeeded brilliantly in tying the hands of Ottawa on
> petroleum.
>
> Under NAFTA, Canada is required to continue exporting
> petroleum to the United States at a level which must
> not fall below the average of the past three years.
> This remarkable commitment stands even should the
> regions of eastern Canada that rely on imported oil
> fall short as a consequence of a supply interruption.
> Not only does Canada have no strategic petroleum
> reserve---a point driven home by the recent work of
> the Parkland Institute in Alberta---under the terms of
> NAFTA Canada must make exports of petroleum to the
> U.S. a higher priority than meeting the energy needs
> of Canadians.
>
> >From the start, NAFTA has been an "unequal treaty" for
> Canadians. The Mexicans, also major oil suppliers to
> the United States, are saddled with no such outrageous
> commitment, for the simple reason that Mexicans would
> never have stood for it.
>
> With petroleum shortages now a real threat in the
> world, Canada needs to renegotiate NAFTA, and if the
> United States is unwilling to reach a deal that
> removes the petroleum export commitments as they
> stand, Ottawa should give notice that Canada will
> withdraw from the trade deal.
>
> Under the Harper Conservatives and the newly
> re-elected Stelmach government in Alberta, the highest
> priority of Canadian economic policy is to increase
> petroleum exports as rapidly as possible, despite the
> ruinous environmental consequences, and the disastrous
> effects of the policy for Canadian industry.
>
> Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has gone to war with
> Ontario insisting that the province slash its
> corporate taxes. By promoting the rapid increase in
> petroleum exports, the Conservatives are directly
> responsible for driving up the value of the Canadian
> dollar so quickly that Canadian manufacturing has had
> no chance to adjust.
>
> The Conservatives have skewed Canadian economic
> development to the long-run detriment of all
> Canadians, including Albertans who face the reduction
> of large regions of their province to a polluted
> moonscape.
>
> Thanks Barack and Hillary, for putting NAFTA back on
> the agenda. In our own national election, which can't
> come too soon, Canadians ought to put the issue front
> and centre.
>
> Blog: http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html
> Blog: http://kencan7.blogspot.com/index.html
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> pen-l at lists.csuchico.edu
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>