Washington File

Can't wait 'til the Americans opt out, we (Canadians), have most of North America's fresh water, and more oil than they have. So I say, bring it on U-ALLS !!!

To all you Canadians bitching about Americans talking about Pulling out of NAFTA.

The problem with NAFTA is not Canada or America.

The problem is trying to compete with a country like Mexico that paying Production workers 1/40 of what Canada and America pays their workers.

I personally Think that Canada and America both should pull out of NAFTA and start up another trade agreement for just Canada and America who both have fairly comparable wage rates.

Then America and Canada should draw up new trade agreements with import tariffs on anything made in Mexico with that $2/day labor.

That would level the LABOR playing field. Then watch the Factories and the Jobs come back home to both Canada and America.

What do you Canadians think about that idea?

Charlene, please. You are among the naive that have no idea how much Canada has been involved in the Iraq war. They are among the 15 nations participating, but choose to remain unnamed, the “Coalition of the Willing to Help but Unwilling to be Seen Helping.”

"How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and how hard it is to undo that work again!" –Mark Twain

First off, Obama wrote about NAFTA in his book years ago. NAFTA is unfair and needs to be changed and fixed for everyone, not just the USA.

NAFTA is big here...people are losing jobs, thousands of folks are losing homes and look to be on the street. Is it all NAFTA...no. But it helps those on the edge to fall. Maybe you in Canada need to know what is going on across the border. I know that your Conservative gov. might like to kowtow to our gov. But things are going to change.

Russert does not make candidates squirm. He makes Democrat candidates squirm. Well, and Steve Forbes. But George Bush, to choose one example, has never been asked tough questions by Russert, nor indeed given anything other than a buddy-buddy joshing and sympathetic understanding by him. Russert's reputation as even-handedly tough is a sham, at least 10 years out of date. Bob Somerby does a fine job of showing this, in the archives of dailyhowler.com. I recommend a search of that site to everyone, including you, Henry.

I think americans would do well to be wary of Obama until he divulges his platform. So far, all I have heard is rhetoric and platitudes and some grand promise for change. It is a clever strategy because of course a positive change would be more than welcome, but will they (or will we) really be happy with that change? We've had change in Canada from Right to Extreme Right and are we happy about it? Definitely NOT. One has to be careful when getting swept in the rhetoric of change without knowing what that change really means.

Clinton and Obama agree that they would supposedly use the NAFTA opt-out clause "as leverage to ensure that we actually get labour and environmental standards that are enforced". What specifically are they talking about and is Canada a major offender in their eyes on whatever those issues are?

I don't think this issue is anything more than a tempest in a teapot: if either candidate had been remotely serious about renegotiating NAFTA they would have begun talking about it in Iowa not Ohio. The fact that Ohio has suffered huge job losses wouldn't have anything to do with the timing of all this would it? Of course not. Still, if it plays well in the sticks it may also in the city so they ride the rocket and wait to see what happens, but don't imagine the pro NAFTA business lobby will let a few hundred thousand job losses wreak havoc on what many see as a win over all.

The so-called "hammer" of oil will NOT play any role whatsoever. We DON"T own the oil in Alberta anymore than Albertans do: they sold those rights off in exchange for an overheating economy a long time ago. If we want to precipitate a war with the US then fool around with the flow of oil to southern refineries, but don't have any fears on that front as our business and government leaders here would as soon drain the provinces dry before anything of the sort happens. Any president who thinks an election gives them a mandate to rock this particular boat is absolutely dreaming in hallucinogenic technicolour of the first rank, although it does make them sound all tough and presidential - like to the great unwashed of a state reeling from employment losses.

Well I think with Flaherty and Harper, then Bush,then McCain having to say something about this issue,I believe some feathers got ruffled.

Also remember not too long ago the same thing happened when?{can't remember his name} made a comment about the'military in Afganistan.It ruffled some feathers too.

I'm thinking some of the stupid comments being made by the U.S. is starting to rile some politicans big time,the same as us ordinary Canadians.

I too remember when Chretien decided not to send Canada to Iraq,the comment'if you are not with us,you are against us.'

I as a Canadian am still pissed off at the comments made back then as are many others.

It was one of the smartest moves made by our Prime Minister.

All those before me have made good if not strong points. It is interesting that when ever US politicians are short on things to say, they always turn to their scatter shot rhetoric comments to Canada.

Others may disagree with me however, I suggest that this behavior has a very simple explanation. Complacency, on the part of Canadian Governmental Leadership. 1) US politicans call Canada a source of terrorists, allowing them to freely penetrate our (Canadian) borders and act as a base for launching their attacks against the USA. Kanukistan I think was the term used; the Canadian governmental response: limp and of little substance. 2) Canada bent to US demands in the negotiation of the NAFTA agreement, to "keep the trade peace" as our economy was reasonably weak by comparison to the US economy 15 years ago. NAFTA allows Canadian resources to be acquired and and sent south of the 49th parallel on the cheap, and then our (Canadian) labor practices are called into question and Softwood lumber companies are held ransom in the hundreds of millions of dollars in tariffs that the US's own courts have deemed illegal according to NAFTA. Canadian Governments response: "Well it is just campaigning talk.", "We are working within the system to resolve the issue."

Remember the Canadian Government also has right to re-negotiate or Opt-Out of the NAFTA agreement. The US does not hold all the cards, nor do they command the drivers position in this case any longer. Perhaps the US politicians should consider carefully, the things that they wish for? They might just find that Canada comes to the table next time with a lot better cards, and if we are lucky strong leadership willing to play them with a poker winning attitude.

Respectfully Submitted.

Well this would be bad news for the PC's and Liberals who have been systematically selling Canada down the drain to the US. I suppose they would have to come up with some other give-away programs in order to completely dismantle what is left of our beloved Canada!
And Harper, renegotiating Nafta in order to get a better deal,,,,,,,,forget that AJ Berry.
They left over a billion dollars on the table with the softwood lumber agreement we got hosed with and had the gall to suggest this was "Good for Canadians"
Good Luck, Don

I agree with Tom. Despite whatever is said about scrapping NAFTA, it is just political rhetoric. Consider the economic realities, Canada and US are each other's largest trading partners by far. Canada is US largest energy supplier (bigger than Saudi Arabia when you include Uranium and Natural Gas and Hydroelectric power). Labour standards really aren't that different between Canada and the US as compared to say US and China. Any pull out would undermine both our economies at this point. NAFTA may be renegotiated in some minor way, renamed or reinvented, but Free Trade in some form or another in North America is here to stay.

In Response to Will from Ontario:
"Frothy??? Excited at maybe losing an agreement that doesn't help Canada and gives the states control of our nation but certainly not frothy. In my humble opinion you can shove NAFTA where the sun don't shine but like your presidential candidates you don't seem to really understand it so no point arguing."

I have a pretty good understanding of the ramification NAFTA has on all the parties involved. Many citizens of Mexico, Canada, and the USA complain about the agreement and argue the other guy is screwing them. On the other hand many have benefited and seen a net gain. In any case my main argument still stands; both Democrat candidates are speaking to their base in Ohio, however ill advised it was. If they do follow through with their threat, it will not pass the Congress and/or Senate. If there is anyone who is not "understanding" I would summit it's you given your colorful response.

I personally would like to see it revisited as I was working at the time.

I also watched not only my plant but many others head to the U.S. and Mexico for cheap labour not QUALITY work.

I also remember a Japanese company was interested in getting a foot in Canada as they were concerned with QUALITY products which CANADA was known for.

Thanks to free trade, they never got the chance.

I have also noticed that the U.S. never follows the rules but expects everybody else too.

Kind of the way they operate all over the world,doing whatever the hell they please but they are now reaping the benefits of what they have sown around the world and at home.

So I do hope they decide to re-open the issue.

Hilliary and Obama.....and NAFTA

So NAFTA may be up for renogiation....
I feel Canada has a 'whip hand' this time, 'OIL', whereas we played from weakness before, and were taken advantage of!

It is difficult to know if ISRAEL will be on our side but will most likely side with the USA.. Under the North American Free Trade Area agreement (NAFTA), Israel, also enjoys duty-free access to Canada and Mexico.

If I was HARPER I'd jump at the chance to RE-NOGIATE NAFTA!

Frothy??? Excited at maybe losing an agreement that doesn't help Canada and gives the states control of our nation but certainly not frothy. In my humble opinion you can shove NAFTA where the sun don't shine but like your presidential candidates you don't seem to really understand it so no point arguing.

Would that they would opt out. Then they would no longer have "unfettered access" to our oil.

Canadians are taking this way to0 seriously. Two candidates spent a few days bashing NAFTA to fire up their base. Once the Ohio primary is complete, NAFTA will not be spoken again. Plus Henry has it right in stating that the President cannot unilaterally withdrawal from NAFTA. He/she must have the support of both Houses, which is very unlikely. So I say to Canada, don’t get all frothy at the mouth over this one.