Labour Says Big U.S. Hug Is Big Business's Bad Idea

By Yussuff, Hassan | Canadian Speeches, September-October 2003 | Go to article overview

Labour Says Big U.S. Hug Is Big Business's Bad Idea


Yussuff, Hassan, Canadian Speeches


Proposals to further integrate the Canadian economy with the United States is not a big idea, says the Canadian Labour Congress. It is a bad idea. It is seen as promoted by big business to gain freer access to the U.S. market at the cost of an independent Canada with a different social model and different foreign policies. Prepared text of speech to the 72 annual Couchiching Couchiching Conference, Couchiching Institute on Public Affairs conference, Geneva Park, Ontario, August 8, 2003.

**********

The "deep integration" or NAFTA-plus agenda--the so-called "big idea"--is gathering force.

It is being very actively promoted by the same folks who brought us "free trade." Tom D'Aquino and the Canadian Council of Chief Executives are busy lobbying government on both sides of the border. The C.D. Howe Institute and other business-friendly think tanks are releasing study after study. Even Brian Mulroney has been resurrected from the politically dead, promoting a new Canada-U.S. deal in both Washington and Ottawa.

The deep integration agenda is being taken very seriously by the federal government. A recent House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee report called for active exploration of a NAFTA-plus arrangement. Canadian-U.S. relations are at the very top of the agenda of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. And Paul Martin has indicated that rebuilding Canadian-U.S. relations will be one of his top priorities as the next prime minister, even though he has provided few details of where he wants to take us.

What do the "deep-integration" crowd want?

Above all, they want the "holy grail" of Canada--U.S. trade relations, secure access to the U.S. market.

As with the FTA, the starting point of the new agenda is defensive.

There is actually very little interest in the big idea in Washington. The big idea is supposed to capture their interest. It is a proposal designed to be so enticing that they can't turn it down.

The big idea is defensive in a second sense.

Already complicated border procedures because of rules of origin and regulatory differences have been compounded by much tighter U.S. security since September 11.

And the FTA and NAFTA have clearly not really created a "single market." The United States still manages trade in its own interests when it wants to--as with softwood lumber and wheat, and now beef.

To get enhanced and more secure access to the U.S. market, the deep-integration crowd have put forward the "big idea." What we are supposed to get is exemption from U.S. countervail and antidumping laws, and far fewer border controls. What they are prepared to offer up in return is what they think the United States wants from Canada--much higher levels of "co-operation" in non-economic areas like defence, security, and immigration, plus enhanced access to Canadian energy.

Dee.S. accp integration is not just an economic agenda. It is really about falling into line with the United States, from a position of weakness. In fact, the main argument is that we really have no choice because we have become so dependent on the United States. And of course, our economy is indeed heavily dependent on exports, some 90% of which now go to the United States.

Some in Canada--the Canadian Alliance, the National Post--enthusiastically support deep integration because they love the George W. Bush vision of the world. Others, the more pragmatic and less ideological crowd which tends to dominate the public service and the Liberal Party, think we have little choice.

It is interesting to note that Sylvia Ostry--former head of the economics department at the OECD and certainly no raving leftist--recently argued that we have become too economically dependent upon the United States for our own good, and too dependent to retain sovereignty in foreign and defence policy. She noted that U. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Labour Says Big U.S. Hug Is Big Business's Bad Idea
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.