Leaders Sign Deal To Harmonize, Integrate At Summit

Posted on Wednesday, March 23 at 12:40 by nancymarie
"It's important the two go hand in hand," he said. "We've done a lot of trade with each other. And we're going to keep it that way." Bush thanked Martin and Fox for their "spirit of partnership," and for making sure democracy, freedom and trade outlast whatever politics may occur between the nations. "One thing is very clear and that is, when we work together as countries to make North America safer and more competitive, the fact is all of the continent and all of our citizens benefit," Martin told reporters. The prime minister called the agreement a "roadmap" focused on "finding practical ways to help our citizenship live healthier, safer and more prosperous lives." "We are determined to forge and ensure the next generation of our continent's success," he said. Fox said the three countries face "new threats that carry a risk for our societies, but we also want to work toward the good performance of our economies." "We want to make North America the most competitive region in the world, and we can do it with actions in the fields of energy, education, technology, security and through protecting our natural resources," Fox said in Spanish. Sensitive issues Martin and Bush pushed aside questions from reporters about the strained relationship between their countries, which soured last month when Canada opted out of the U.S. ballistic missile defence program. Martin said Canada won't re-consider its decision to pull out of the program, adding that the two countries have had their share of differences in the past but that the relationship remains strong. Bush dismissed any differences that exist as natural. The president said he knows firsthand that softwood lumber is clearly a sensitive issue. "But think about all the trade we've got between our countries. We've resolved a lot of issues in a positive manner and will continue to resolve them," he said. "We had an issue with cows that is getting resolved. I am amazed that we don't have more sharp disagreements because we are doing a lot together. I think the relationship is very strong and very positive." Martin talked about the need to get rid of "nuisance regulations" that would make sure North America stays competitive with rising economies such as Asia. "What we really want to do is to make very, very substantial progress, and to make sure that we continue to do it so that the forces of protectionism never take over in North America," Martin said. CTV's Ottawa bureau chief Bob Fife told Newsnet that Bush is "looking beyond just North American integration." The president is setting his sights further to South America, and "creating this great big trading block to compete with growing economies like China and the European union." Fife also warned not to expect any major movement on Canada-U.S. trade issues at this summit. "The key thing here is they're going to try to establish a good working relationship," said Fife. A joint statement issued by the leaders outlines the establishment of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America -- a "trilateral effort to increase the security, prosperity, and quality of life of our citizens." As part of their efforts to improve security, the countries promise to: * implement common border security strategies, including a continent-wide screening process of people and cargo; * enhance protection of infrastructure; * co-ordinate emergency response efforts in case of a natural or terrorist disaster at the borders; and * improve aviation and maritime security. To improve trade, the leaders said they will: * improve productivity through regulatory cooperation; * promote collaboration in areas of energy, transportation, financial service and technology; * reduce the costs of trade through the efficient movement of goods and people; and * enhance the "stewardship of environment" and create a safer and more reliable food supply. Following the press conference, the leaders will fly to Bush's 700 hectare, canyon-filled ranch in Crawford, Texas. The less formal atmosphere there could help heal relations that soured when Martin decided not to participate in the U.S. ballistic missile defence program. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1111583825468_66/?hub=TopStories

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:36 pm
    "Okay, here is the plan.
    1. We nail shut the bankruptcy escape hatch (done).
    2. Get everybody buried under tons of cheap credit cards. (Almost done).
    3. Flood the US and canada with chreap labor from Mexico to drive down wages. (In progress).
    4. Send interest rates skyrocketing and take posession of all private property in the US and Canada not owned by millionaires. (About to happen).

    People without homes will do what they are told. Which reminds me, who are we invading next?" and will canada be part of the next invasion with the US

    the politicians can not be trusted, it is a take over by the rich elite, kiss your normal life good-bye and see you on the bread line.....

  2. Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:45 pm
    So much to discuss, and get very nervous about, here. <P> <blockquote> Martin talked about the need to get rid of "nuisance regulations" that would make sure North America stays competitive with rising economies such as Asia. <P> "What we really want to do is to make very, very substantial progress, and to make sure that we continue to do it so that the forces of protectionism never take over in North America," Martin said. </blockquote> <P> First, an obvious reference to the smart regulation plan here which will increase harmonization of our regulations with the U.S. And since Martin didn't negotiate an end to the softwood lumber crisis or the BSE crisis, which are based a LOT in US protectionism, yet he's pushing ahead with the harmonization of our regulations, when he says "protectionism" here, read "nationalism"--ie, Martin is saying he won't let the forces of nationalism, the forces that oppose integration, decide North America's future. <P> <blockquote> CTV's Ottawa bureau chief Bob Fife told Newsnet that Bush is "looking beyond just North American integration." <P> The president is setting his sights further to South America, and "creating this great big trading block to compete with growing economies like China and the European union." </blockquote> <P>Increasing and improving "trade" is really a nice way of saying "US economic dominance/imperialism", as we we're all found out the hard way under NAFTA; the US is just too big and ends up pushing us smaller countries around, and don't doubt for a second that it will happen even more so with this "giant trading block" in place. <P> Why take over just one continent when you can take over two? This is exactly why we keep saying "deep integration" is just imperialism going by a more media-friendly name. <P> And then there are all those terrifying bullet points, of which these are the most terrifying to me: <P> <blockquote> * implement common border security strategies, including a continent-wide screening process of people and cargo</blockquote> <P> North American security perimeter here we come. Well, who needed civil liberties or multiculturalism anyway, when we can have secret trials and detentions of immigrants and dissidents, security certificates, Ashcroft and racial profiling instead? <P> <blockquote> * improve productivity through regulatory cooperation</blockquote> <P> Smart regulations aren't smart, they're dumb: help us oppose this now through our featured action at left. <P> But the whole list sounds bad when you start thinking past the nicey-nicey rhetoric and look at the practical implications. <P> We need to get working, people. Vive le Canada! This country is not for sale!<p>---<br>Now call it extreme if you like, but I propose we hit it hard, and we hit it fast, with a major, and I mean major, leaflet campaign.--Rimmer, Red Dwarf<br />

  3. Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:25 pm
    Sue - you're so right about "so much to be nervous about here". I haven't been around much, but I wanted to extend a personal 'thank you' for your initiative in this area.

    ---
    ... just a friendly reminder to always take the internet less seriously than you take your gut!

  4. Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:39 pm
    I just heard Thomas D'Aquino talking about this on the CBC, and it was enraging.

    He was going on about how we should start thinking ourselves as North Americans. Then he started ranting about how terrorism was everywhere ("just turn on the evening news"). Finally he lamented that the US was so big and powerful, and we were so weak and pathetic, that we had to do whatever they told us.

    What kind of country lets this guy be a national spokesman?

    ---
    If you don't like these ideas, I've got others. --Marshall McLuhan

  5. Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:55 pm
    well, I've never known the man to be anything less than enraging...

    "What kind of country lets this guy be a national spokesman?"

    I'm tempted to say "a desparate one", but only because "a corrupt one" paints us all with that brush.

    ---
    ... just a friendly reminder to always take the internet less seriously than you take your gut!

  6. Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:07 pm
    Here's what I don't get. I may not be an elected politician, or some genius in politics. But is it stupid of me to think that if there was gonna be harmonization of regulations, shouldn't it have been a new one that reflected the interest of each country, rather then just harmonizing with the U.S.

    Do we see the harmonization in Europe coming from just one country. Example all countries have to harmonize to the largest country in the European Union? I don't think so.

    Kevin

  7. Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:15 pm
    This is puppetry. Luckily there are people here who still live here.

    ---
    The midget, Bush, and that Rumsfield deserve only to be beaten with shoes by freedom loving people everywhere.

    - Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, The Iraqi Informat

  8. Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:46 pm
    Thanks, and thanks so much for posting this article Nancymarie so we heard what was happening.

    ---
    Now call it extreme if you like, but I propose we hit it hard, and we hit it fast, with a major, and I mean major, leaflet campaign.--Rimmer, Red Dwarf

  9. Thu Mar 24, 2005 12:48 am
    I am so angry about this. It would be okay, if it was something like our first nations people had, but not this american hegemony. When have americans ever lived up to agreements? This only serves them and judging by the bse and the lumber problems it will continue. Is Martin an idiot? God I wish we had someone with vision at the helm and not corporate money dogmatists. Just who is the enemy of Canada?
    I read their blogs and online papers and they are so narcissistic and self absorbed that I can only wonder why they continue to have credibility. Are we that afraid of them? I just wish the rest of the world would put them in their place and not be so nice.

    ---
    rhondda

  10. Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:00 am
    What this is all about is allowing big corporations rule. Every time we make this kind of an agreement we lose our ability to govern ourselves. Neo-conservatism believes that wealth should rule not democratic institutions. It is no wonder that d'Aquino and the business elite in Canada are estatic. The CEOs of the multinational companies make fortunes every year in salaries and perks but that is not enough. It is never enough. Since the US laws will dominate they will be in the interests of the business elite especially the business elite. They don't want just to be rich, they want to be "filthy" rich.

  11. Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:49 am
    But they are also nationalist, no? They want Canada's throat....maybe I'm dreaming.

  12. by mk
    Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:24 pm
    From the CCCE itself (April 2004):<br />
    <br />
    <a href="http://www.ceocouncil.ca/en/about/A_Canadian_Agenda_for_Progress_and_Prosperity_April_2004.pdf">http://www.ceocouncil.ca/en/about/A_Canadian_Agenda_for_Progress_and_Prosperity_April_2004.pdf</a><br />
    <br />
    Questions (not loaded):<br />
    <br />
    - how reasonable/unreasonable are the stated objectives in this document?<br />
    - how reasonable/unreasonable are the mechanisms proposed?<br />
    - how accurately does the Martin/Fox/Bush plan track the objectives/mechanisms mentioned?<br />
    - what practical alternatives exist to the methods/mechanisms presented?<br />

  13. Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:30 pm
    What is really sad is that most of these people could care less about any country. Their only sense of patriotism is to their own narrow social and economic group. They can live anywhere in the world they please and take their money with them (that is why the plan proposes total capitalist freedom). American CEOs are just as likely as Canadian CEOs to deposit their wealth in secret bank accounts and tax havens. They simply have had slightly different ones than Canadians.

    Some may have affection for their countries for allowing them the ability to be mass exploiters of the resources and people. To them people are only massive consumers who make them rich. My definition of a true capitalist is one who produces or encourages to be produced something he would not use himself.

  14. Thu Mar 24, 2005 9:53 pm
    1. It is impossible to understand the vague jargon to evaluate what it really means.

    2. Most of whatever this is will be in place before any of us know about it and/or until it impacts on us.

    3. It will be whatever the big corporate CEOs want it to be.

    4. Since it will be the "stakeholders," which is simply a politically correct term for the owners or controllers of capital, that will be the only ones allowed at the table with politicians it ensures # 3.

    What we are dealing with is an entrenched oligarchy that has deep pockets and has in the past bought political influence. With the new party financing laws they are in a hurry to try to get Canada committed to something that is likely not in the best interests of ordinary Canadians but that cannot be easily changed. Because of the new laws they have developed novel ways to make their influence felt.



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news