Monday, April 9, 2012

Canada-U.S. Commentary Highlights

by Keith Edmund White, Editor-in-Chief

*Note an earlier version of this article incorrectly referred to James Coan as Joan Coan, and omitted to refer to other Woodrow Wilson materials related to deepwater drilling.

A wrap up some commentary from March and April I thought might be of interest. Topics include Canada's federal and Ontario's provincial budget, Canada's Asia pivot, offshore drilling, a chat with the Prime Minister, and some summit forecasting.

Canada’s Asia Push. Paul Wells blogs on Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney’s tying Canada’s “unsteady” recovering with Canada’s shrinking share of the world’s export since 2000. The cause: the high Canadian dollar and “a reflection of who we traded with than how effectively we did it.” And guess what “who” he’s talking about? The United States. The solution? “[R]efocus[ing] on commodities exports to Asia.”

Two Budgets, Four Commentaries Plus a Quick US Comparison. Last week, Canada’s Conservative federal government released its first majority budget; at the same time, Ontario Liberal government released its first budget as a minority government. Fleishman Hillard’s Anne Marie Quinn provides some context to the budget proposals. Even in these two different situations, American readers can glean the dramatic difference in Canada's budget politics. The Fraser Institute slams the Conservative government “no-cut” (but rather cost savings budget), arguing that the Conservatives should have used their new majority government to “enact a bold and aggressive plan to balance the budget more quickly through actual reductions in spending.” Finally, going back to Ontario, this Atlantic Market Institute for Market Studies sets forth broad guidelines of balancing Ontario’s budget through cuts, not new revenues. Best budget overview, though, goes to Michael Holden's blog post at the Canada West Foundation.

Assessing Summits—More Players, Less Substance? Chris Sands reads the past and future Summit dance-card, predicting which ones are worth watching—and which aren’t.

Woodrow Wilson Center Gets Two Shout-Outs:
Canada’s Offshore Drilling—Decentralized Better (Or Should We Be Looking at Other Variables)? Woodrow Wilson’s Canada Institute chats with two experts on the differences in the U.S. and Canadian offshore drilling political regimes. interviews Alexander MacDonald, managing partner of the St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador office of Cox & Palmer, an Atlantic Canadian law firm. Offers some nice (and thankfully well-edited) clips with Mr. MacDonald. Key insight: offshore drilling is a provincial-federal issue, not like America’s debate which is held hostile on the national stage. Joan James Coan, Energy Forum research associate at the James Baker III Institute for Public Policy then comes up and pushes back a bit: he notes that even if a (future Republican) U.S. president took the federal obstacles away, how many States would actually opt for drilling? While he might be right on western coast Florida and the Northwest, I’m not so sure about Virginia. 
Some omissions additional aspects of note: (1) discussion on the politics of Canada west coast offshore moratorium, and (2) the different model of offshore regulation Canada uses ("goal oriented") from the United States (criticized as overly "prescriptive"). Yes, a bit wonky--but critical to assessing whether any U.S. offshore expansion sticks (not to mention if Canada is sticking on its own Deep Water Horizon time bomb).

The Woodrow Wilson Center offers more of these topics in their publication The Risk and Regulation of Deepwater Offshore Drilling: American and Canadian Perspectives and the 14th edition of the Center's One Issue, Two Voices series with James Coan, Alexander MacDonald, and moderator David Longly Bernhardt on the topic of deepwater offshore drilling. This March 7, 2012 event is what led to the shorter interviews discussed above.

[Note: CUSLI-Nexus thanks the Woodrow Wilson Center for bringing the misnaming of Rice University Research Associate James Coan and its deepwater drilling materials to its attention]
Woodrow Wilson Snags PM Harper for hour-long chat in DC. Harper chats on Canada’s envious economic performance over the recession, among other topics. A “very solid system of financial regulation” – really? What about that murky, provincial system of securities regulation?) Harper notes Canada’s stimulus response (emphasizing “shovel-ready projects” like the U.S.), but emphasizes that Canada’s smaller debt as giving it greater flexibility. But let’s be fair: Canada had the nice buffers of a booming economy market and a property market that hasn’t crashed. And, perhaps, a less polarized political sphere? And what about simple differences in scale between the two stimulus approaches? But I would be interested in reading a comparison on Canada and America’s stimulus approaches. Harper also dishes on Keystone XL, foreign policy, health-care, Canada joining the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and other topics. Two additional topics worth noting here: Canada’s push for FTAs around the world, and Canada’s “profile challenge” when it comes to addressing tensions in the U.S.-Canadian relationship.

And Canada West Foundation Reports on Water in Stress Points. Could federal involvement in water policy be on its way? This March 2012 Report describes seven stress points in Canada’s water security. The culprits? Agricultural demand for water, shale gas development, oil sands development, uranium mining, urban growth in Canada’s west, the deteriorating health of Lake Winnipeg—which could pose become a thorn in the US-Canadian relationship. One important point brought up by the report: where do aboriginal rights fall into increasing Canada’s water security? Another point not really discussed: assuming the federal government wants to stretch its muscle in this provincial area, in light of the Canadian Supreme Court’s ruling on securities regulation, what shape should it/will it take? Final note: were getting a national water policy in Canada depend on the NDP leadership race?

And Yes, It Is All About Gas. Finally, Metanoodle cuts through some of the noise on what can and can not be solved when it comes to North American energy prices. Key points: (1) gotta think in oil districts and (2) the sexy topic of transfer capacity. And is four cents enough when it comes to the Keystone XL pipeline?

No comments:

Post a Comment