“We’ve taken away from the music-teacher type people, people on the
front line delivering services. We’ve reduced their ranks and what have
we added? Well, if they don’t have the policy advisory function that we
once did, the one thing we’ve added—and in my view grossly
oversupplied—is oversight bodies, oversight functions, reporting
requirements,” he explained.
“Not that long ago, 25 years ago, 71 per cent of federal public
servants were in the field, in regional offices and local offices.
Today, it’s down to 57 per cent. Imagine the shift,” he said.
Prof. Savoie said that the public service is now burdened with so many
reporting requirements that many public servants are “shell-shocked”
about always having one or more oversight bodies looking over their
shoulders.
The solution according to Prof. Savoie?
“The only way really is to de-layer management, say that from now on
there will only be four management layers: deputy minister, assistant
deputy minister, director general, and directors. No more of these
associates and layering management levels. That consumes a lot of paper
and a lot of make-work activities,” he noted.
When Prof. Savoie was speaking to senior bureaucrats about his book,
they tried to persuade him not to write it, he said. They were concerned
that it would heap more criticism onto the already unloved civil
service.
“I don’t think this book is critical of the public service, or critical
of politicians, it just explains how we’ve gone astray,” said Prof.
Savoie.
“I think we need to give a sense of value and esteem to the public
service. I think we cannot denigrate the public service and think that
all will be well,” he said.
Emphasis on "most." Also, we could problematize what is meant by reliable when it comes to trade with other nations. (Trade, copyright, cybersecurity, and China anyone?)
The general conclusion was that a second-term Obama administration is likely to continue on a protectionist trajectory, and to cement its role as an economic competitor of Canada’s, rather than its historically overwhelming role as a reliable trading partner. ... Finally, Simon Fraser University Professor Alexander Moens concludes that the United States is going to shift from being Canada’s most reliable, and largest trading partner to a global rival; diversification of export markets needs to be Canada’s focus in coming years, as it has in the recent past. Professor Moens observes that “. . . the United States will not be willing to deal with Canada on trade and investment in a strategic manner until it needs cooperation with Canada . . . because of its own relative weakness vis-à-vis the rest of the world, and that will still be another decade or so.”
Moens concludes that for Canadians the message of the 2012 U.S. Presidential election is “The next phase of Canada’s economic development will likely take place in a political constellation of several world powers. Canada’s well-being will depend on a combination of competitive market factors at home and specific deals with multiple trade partners abroad among which the United States will likely still be the largest.”
As noted by Beyond the Border Observer, leaders of two top business associations praise Beyond the Border and suggest steps Canada and the United States can take to improve their economic relationship.
They [Engler & Manley]...stress that “a lot more needs to be done to transform bottlenecks at the border into gateways for the legitimate flow of people and goods.”
On the top of their list? “[S]tronger regulatory cooperation where it makes sense.”
And they also urge both nations “to move beyond pilot projects, feasibility studies, and regulatory reviews to fuller implementation – transforming words and good intentions into more concrete and longer-term action.
Finally, Engler and Manley urge the countries to move forward on important cross-border infrastructure projects, Keystone XL and a new bridge between Windsor and Detroit, and also impose deadlines for parts made in one country and assembled in the other to “travel without interruption… .”
White House press secretary Jay Carney said the administration will not be pushed into making a hasty decision on whether to approve the Keystone XL pipeline. More than half the Senate -- 53 senators -- signed a letter to President Obama on Wednesday urging quick approval. "We appreciate input from lawmakers, but as you know, as is keeping with longstanding tradition, multi adminstrations, multi-administration tradition, these reviews are conducted by the State Department, and when the State Department concludes that process, we make, we’ll move forward," Carney said. "There will be a decision, but I'm not going to get ahead of that process.
The Globe and Mail probes today's confirmation hearing of Senator John Kerry, with Sen. Kerry likely to head the federal agency currently reviewing the Keystone XL project. The article also focuses on environmentalists' hopes that the the inaugural address of President Obama--the ultimate decider on approving the project--signals aversion to the pipeline project:
Still, amidst the jibes and good wishes, Mr. Kerry’s views on climate change in general and Keystone XL in particular should provide a hint as to whether the President’s lofty rhetoric on cutting carbon will translate into political reality. Republican Senator John McCain, who, like Mr. Kerry, tried and failed in a bid for the presidency, joked that senators would use so-called enhanced interrogation techniques to make sure Mr. Kerry, was being forthcoming. “We will bring back, for the only time, water-boarding to get the truth out.” Still, some expect Mr. Kerry to duck if and when he is quizzed about Keystone XL. In delaying a final decision until after the November election, the President sent the proposal back to the State Department for a revised assessment and Mr. Kerry may opt to await that outcome, expected in late March or April, rather than telegraph his views. ... But the final Keystone decision “will be made in the White House, not by the Secretary of State,” said Daniel Kessler of 350.org. Hence the delight among Keystone XL opponents after the President’s stirring vow to take action on climate change. “A failure to do so would betray our children and future generations,” said Mr. Obama of the need to stop global warming. Mr. Kerry’s environmental advocacy stretches back decades and he was co-sponsor of the ill-fated Senate effort to introduce a cap-and-trade effort to curb carbon emissions. Along with his wife, Teresa Heinz, heiress to the food fortune, he wrote a book in 2007 called: This Moment on Earth: Today’s New Environmentalists and Their Vision for the Future. While the approval this week by Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman of a new pipeline routing that avoids a sensitive underground aquifer, Keystone XL is now banking on the President and Mr. Kerry to block the project. “You cannot say the words the President did in his inaugural address and then turn around and approve the pipeline,” said Jane Kleeb, who heads Bold Nebraska, a group opposed to Keystone. “The fight continues, even though Governor Heineman sided with a foreign corporation.”
The Canada-U.S. economic relationship continues to
be one of the world’s most important and dynamic, as shown by a series of
articles published over the last two weeks.
Whether looking at Ford production moves, the
evolving Canada-U.S. trading relationship, or the impact of the 2012 U.S.
election on the Canadian economy, the Canada-U.S. economic relationship
continues to play a major role not only in the global economy, but in daily
lives of Americans and Canadians alike.
The
2013 Big Picture Economic Prediction:
Canada Will Benefit from America’s ‘Resurgent’ Economy
While America may finally surpass Canada in economic
growth in 2013, this U.S. resurgence may be just the buffer Canada needs as its
housing market cools, reports John the
Financial Post’s John Shmuel.
Shmuel reports on the Economic Club of Canada’s Economic
Outlook 2013 forum, an event that brought together six
economists who shared and discussed their 2013 predictions for the Canadian and
American economies.
Canada’s economy has certainly been losing steam during the past few months. Growth in October was just 0.1%, after a flat September and a decline of 0.1% in August. The economists agreed that while Canada may lag the U.S. in economic growth, it will certainly benefit from a resurgent U.S., especially when it came to exports. The U.S. continues to be the largest destination for Canadian exports, accounting for almost 80% of goods shipped outside of the border. “For Canada, it’s not a bad export environment,” [RBC Financial Markets Chief Economist Craig] Wright said. “So we are seeing export prospects improving and we continue to think they will pick up.” Naturally, Canada’s housing sector was a much discussed topic at the forum. Craig Wright…said Canada’s housing market was “cooling” rather than “collapsing.”
Summing it all up, Craig Alexander, chief economist with TD Bank Financial Group, said that 2013 is a year of transition. The pendulum will swing back, he said, to a stronger global economy, but this will be over the course of the year. “Emerging markets will be the lion’s share of global economic growth.” The advanced world is still fragile, he continued, but the strongest areas will be North America—particularly the U.S.
The Canada-U.S. Auto Relationship: While GM Moves Camaro Production from Oshawa to Lansing, Chrysler and Ford Plan Canadian Expansions
The Canadian-U.S. auto partnership, dating back to the 1965 Auto Pact, is one of the most concrete aspects of Canada and America’s economic cooperation. But while the 1965 Auto Pact liberalized and integrated the Canadian-U.S. auto industry, this binational auto relationship remains dynamic and ever-evolving.
As reported by Scott
Deveau at the Financial Post, General Motors of
Canada has announced plans to move Camaro production jobs from Oshawa to
Lansing.
The reason?
GM Motors Canada Kevin Williams cited Canada’s continuing status as “the
highest-cost producer for General Motors anywhere…and [Canadaian] labour costs
are among the highest” when discussing the Camaro production move.
But while GM may be moving jobs out, Chrysler and Ford
appear on route to create Canadian jobs.
From Deveau’s
January 16th report:
Still, Chrysler has shown interest in bringing more work to Canada, or at least extending the life of its plants here. Sergio Marchionne, Chrysler Group LLC’s chief executive, told reporters the automaker’s Windsor plant, which is running on three shifts, five days a week, 24 hours a day, “should” be in line to build the new Dodge and Chrysler minivans when they are announced. At the same time, Dianne Craig, Ford Motor Co. of Canada CEO, said she is still pushing ahead with a proposal to bring a new global platform to Ford’s plant in Oakville, Ont.
Whatever the movements of the Big Three, the
resurgence of GM, Chrysler and Ford--with their deep production connections on both sides of the Canadian-U.S. border--shows the durability and value of
Canada and America’s economic cooperation.
Target’s
Canadian Arrival & Walmart’s Canadian Expansion
After 50 years, Target is entering the global
marketplace. Target's first international
target? Canada. From Thomas
Lee at the StarTribune:
But Target's international ambition has less to do with bragging rights than basic survival. Not only is Target running out of room to grow, but recession-worn American consumers haven't been as eager to open their wallets, much to the benefit of low-priced competitors like Wal-Mart and Amazon. … Target has been able to hold its ground by focusing on savvy marketing and exclusive partnerships with prominent designers. But even that magic seems to be fading, as a recent collaboration with Neiman Marcus flopped. Target's website also is a work in progress: key items were out of stock during the critical holiday shopping season. So Target needs Canada. In addition to steady economic growth, the country has weathered the global financial crisis better than most nations. Target's potential in Canada is the reason investors have largely ignored its recent holiday struggles.
Naturally, Walmart is moving fast to consolidate the Canadian market. From the Canadian Press:
Walmart will spend $450 million this year to open several new stores and expand its distribution network in Canada amid what is becoming an increasingly competitive retail landscape in this country. The U.S.-based discount retailer says it plans on completing at least 37 additional supercentre projects by the end of next January, bringing the total number of Canadian locations to 388. … Although the company refused to go into specifics, it says some of the supercentres slated to open will be in Maritimes, where Walmart isn't currently operating supercentres. The expansion will also create 7,000 jobs -- half of which will be retail positions. … Walmart first came to Canada in the early 1990s, and since then has been expanding year after year. Last year was one of its most aggressive for the discount chain, with the opening of 73 new Canadian locations amid announced spending plans of more than $750 million.
Meh or Wow?
What the 2012 Election Means to the Canada
While all agree on the economic impact Canada and
the United States have on one another, is this relationship impacted by who
sits in the White House?
The Fraser Institute and Edmonton Journal come to
two different conclusions regarding the binational impact of America’s 2012
elections.
Highlights
include the impact of U.S. monetary policy on the Canadian
economy, the possible effects of a fully implemented Affordable Care Act on the
Canadian healthcare system, and the risk posed by possible political gridlock
over U.S. debt-reduction to Canada’s economic welfare.
But the Edmonton Sun, in
a November 7th article, suggests the
reelection of Barack Obama and the continuation of Democratic and Republican
majorities in the House and Senate, respectively, will not have a significant
impact on Canadians.
With the American
election over, the University of Alberta hosted a panel featuring political
science teachers to discuss what U.S. President Barack Obama’s re-election
means to Canadians.
The short answer was
not a lot.
“It is very rare for a
Canadian issue to hit the president’s desk,” said Utah native and associate
professor in the university’s faculty of political science Greg Anderson.
“Most of the things out
of the United States that affect Canada don’t involve the president.”
Canadian-U.S. Economic Cooperation & BTB: A History of Success, Continued Commitment
The economic relationship between Canada and the United States has been one of the most successful of the 20th century. But this past success can only continue if both nations continue to skillfully manage their shared border and deep economic ties.
Fortunately, The Beyond the Border Action Plan (BTB) shows both nations political commitment to ensure a robust cross-border relationship into the 21st century.
enhanced ShipriderPrograms and the scheduled deployment of joint Canadian and U.S. law enforcement teams in Michigian/Ontario and Washington State/British Columbia
But BTB's success has been slow, and we'll see how much attention Canada-U.S. relations get in the United States in President Obama's second term.
The Beyond the Border Initiative has shown slow success in completing its goals, according to a progress report released by the Canadian government on Dec. 14. The initiative was developed just over a year ago to ease border crossing between Canada and the United States for law-abiding citizens, said Don Alper, director of Western’s Canadian-American Studies and Border Policy Research Institute. “It’s not dramatic in terms of anything earth shaking,” Alper said.
Ambassador David Jacobson will be stepping down as America's ambassador to Canada, reports Postmedia News:
U.S. President Barack Obama will be sending a new ambassador to Canada this year, a move that could have ramifications for Canada-U.S. relations. ...
Jacobson has been a leading player in helping Canada and the U.S. smooth over some bilateral irritants. Perhaps most significantly, he was a crucial force behind advocating for the Canada-U.S. border deal that tightens security while also speeding access at the border. He has also developed a strong personal rapport and working relationship with Gary Doer, Canada's Ambassador to the U.S. ...
Colin Robertson, a former Canadian diplomat who once worked at Canada's Embassy in Washington, said in an interview Tuesday that the bilateral relationship benefited thanks to Jacobson. ...
"Jacobson, because of the personal relationship, clearly had clout," said Robertson. "You want an American ambassador who can pick up the phone and get through to the White House - to the president or the chief of staff. And Jacobson had those attributes."
The major accomplishment during Jacobson's term was the achievement of a "Beyond the Border" agreement signed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Obama.
Under the deal, both governments are embarking on pilot projects to adopt a joint "perimeter security" approach to protect the border.
Was the first debate a warm-up match, or was it a blown opportunity for the Liberal Party to caste itself as the best alternative to Prime Minister Harper?
The 9-person debate, the first public debate among Liberal leadership contenders, seems to be getting more news owing to its format than the substance.
iPolitics's Joan Bryden offers a solid recap and analysis of the first liberal debate. (For the best overview of the topics discussed at the debate, I would recommend Susana Mas's CBC report.)
Bryden's conclusion: the candidates have little reason to punch hard at this point, and this is more of a waiting game to see who drops out first.
Anyone hoping to make a come-from-behind win will have to gain support from rival candidates as they drop off the ballot. As a result, none of the dark horses is likely to say anything during the debate to alienate supporters of their fellow long-shots.
…
Even so, Trudeau’s challengers are likely to show restraint, conscious that many Liberals would never forgive a candidate who launched a no-holds-barred assault on the probable winner, thereby handing the Conservatives devastating fodder for their next wave of attack ads.
Liberals haven’t forgotten that the Tories used footage from the 2006 Liberal leadership debates to skewer the winner of that contest, Stephane Dion.
Unlike the NFC final, the Liberal debate was a ho-hum affair; it had too many candidates and not enough new ideas.
In many ways, it was an opportunity lost for a party desperately seeking to rebuild its brand. For one of the few times since 2011, the Liberals were the centre of the 'Canadian-poli' world. In fact, at one point during the afternoon, #LPCdb8 was the number one trending Twitter hashtag in all of Canada.
But they blew it.
I wouldn’t go that far. Why? With so much time between now and the next parliamentary election, the leadership debate will probably not include ground-shaking policies or words. Why waste your firepower?
Instead, a nine-person debate series that slowly eeks out a leader mainly serves to test how Trudeau handles the public pressure. And if he blows it, a chance for an alternative candidate.
To expect more—given the current state of the Liberal Party—from the race in terms of both substance and impact seems more a pundit’s dream than smart party move.
Last week Canadian and American defense and security experts met and took the first step to chart North American Aerospace Defense Command’s (NORAD) 21st century mission. While NORAD failed to get mention in Beyond the Border’s (BTB) first report card, its proof of the benefits that Canadian and American security cooperation yields.
NORAD, a 1958 agreement crafted to defend Canada and the United States Russian nuclear weaponry, has a long history of adapting itself to new times. (Or, perhaps more well-known to readers, NORAD is the organization that tracks Santa’s Christmas Eve globe-tracking flight.)
The discussion was a first step toward a broad analysis to identify what threats and challenges the United States and Canada will face in the 2025-to-2030 timeframe -- and what steps need to be taken now to prepare for them,, [Royal Canadian Air Force Lt. Gen. J.A.J. ‘Alain’] Parent said.
NORAD Next is largely a vision at this point, Parent emphasized, and any changes to the binational NORAD agreement would require both countries’ approval. But vast changes in the security landscape have produced broad agreement that NORAD must continually evolve to meet challenges to North America, he said. …
More than a decade after 9/11, NORAD officials are widening their field of vision yet again as they discuss roles the command could play in addressing threats from a broad array of domains: air, space, sea, land and even cyberspace.
They also are working to identify what warning systems and processes will be required to address these threats, particularly as the life cycles of many of the current radars expire in the 2020-2025 timeframe.
Although there has been little change to NORAD’s fundamental role over the years, there has been a continuous evolution of its mission. As discussed earlier, NORAD’s early mission of deterring, detecting, and intercepting Soviet bombers, soon expanded to missile detection and warning, with the later inclusion of internal air traffic, and, much later, the warning of threats from the seas. The uniqueness of the binational agreement encourages the use of NORAD to address threats of interest to Canada and the United States. One could therefore broaden the discussion to speculate upon what else could fit into the NORAD mission. An area of interest that immediately comes to mind is the Arctic.
Let us take a brief look at the Soviet missile threat. It’s a fairly dynamic one. In case you have never seen a Soviet Intercontinental Ballistic Missile being fired, here is a short film clip. The whole family of Soviet ICBMs numbers over sixteen hundred targeted for North America. Some of the older ones are being dismantled in favour of submarine launched missiles. The SS-9 in the middle is the largest intercontinental missile in the world. It’s about 110 feet tall, as high as an eleven-storey building, destined for targets such as Cheyenne Mountain, perhaps, or some of our missile fields, or maybe even the Bank of Montreal… So while we wait for details on what NORAD Next will and will not do, it’s clear that NORAD has and will continue to play a critical role in Canadian-American security cooperation. Furthermore, even if you don’t read NORAD and BTB in the same press release, the two joint endeavors are closely related and—on the security front—will likely build on one another.
Here are some ongoing NORAD projects and possible new ventures that may be grabbing headlines in 2013:
Adding Mexico? Jessica Zuckerman at The Heritage Foundation calls for adding Mexico to NORAD.
Arctic Cooperation. Col (Ret.) Alan Stephenson pushes for a robust NORAD Arctic role, and pushes Canadians not to let Arctic sovereignty concerns get in the way. And it seems that NORAD, along with independent U.S. and Canadian military commands, are doing pushing ahead on Arctic Cooperation. Check out December 2012’s Framework for Arctic Cooperation.
By Keith Edmund White, Editor-in-Chief The after-effects of XL Foods E. coli-related beef recall are still being felt, with the Beyond the Border (BTB) pilot pre-clearance for meat shipments between Canada and the United States on ice while the U.S. reviews it's food-safety measures.
The tension is clear: while easing restrictions at the border saves $100 an hour per driver for Canadian meat shippers, concerns over eliminating U.S. safety inspections for Canadian meat post-XL Foods has frozen this aspect of BTB for the time being.
The XL Foods E. coli outbreak highlighted some very troubling aspects of the Canadian and American meat 'safety net', in both the meat-processing and contamination response consumer protection safeguard systems.
Perhaps the pause in the pre-clearance program will allow business groups and advocacy groups--like the Food & Water Watch organization--can work together to ensure meat screening systems in both countries are equally robust, ensuring a safe and efficient flow of products throughout Canada and the United States.
CBC reported yesterday on Food & Water Watch's recent lobbying effort, and resulting Canadian concern over deteriorating U.S. confidence in the Canadian food safety system:
An internal Foreign Affairs memo expressed concern that U.S. "confidence in the Canadian food safety system" could be undermined in the wake of last fall's XL Foods beef recall.
...
Josée De Menezes, the department's acting director of the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Division, expressed that concern on Sept. 27 in a widely distributed departmental briefing note obtained under the Access to Information Act by CBC News Network's Power & Politics.
Specifically, the note refers to a U.S. campaign to halt a meat pre-clearance pilot project that is part of the Canada-U.S. Beyond the Border initiative announced last year by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. President Barack Obama.
...
Tony Corbo, a senior lobbyist for Food & Water Watch's food campaign, said the Sept. 18 letter to the U.S. agriculture secretary, which his group helped write, speaks for itself.
"I'm not trying to indict Canadian meat as being less safe than U.S. meat," Corbo told CBC News. "But the fact of the matter is we have photographs indicating there was visible fecal contamination on meat products coming into the United States that were inspected at these border inspection stations. And we don't understand why there is an attempt to de-regulate a system that is actually working."
...
The Canadian Meat Council is one of several groups that have been pushing for the pilot project to cut delays at the border.
"The pilot project itself only talks about getting the re-sampling, testing or inspections, getting it away from the border," said James Laws, the council's executive director.
He said the rest of the shipments not slated for testing will be "pre-cleared" before reaching the border, allowing them get to market sooner.
A council presentation on the project argues that "redirecting Canadian meat trucks to U.S. inspection centres also wastes time and fuel" and delays drivers from getting back on the road, at a cost of "roughly $100" per hour.
Want a primer on key issues impacting the Canada-U.S. bilateral relationship? Check out the Woodrow Wilson Center's Canada Institute Activities 2012: A Year in Review, a publication that summarizes and provides links to the Institute's 2012 events and publications. From links to reports and archived webcasts that cover the Beyond the Border Initiative, discussions with Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and other speakers discussing topics ranging from Canada and America's energy policies and the ongoing Arctic race, this brochure offers links to the issues that define one of the world's most important bilateral relationships.
By Keith Edmund White, Editor-in-Chief When thinking about liberalized trade, some may conjure up images of presidential and prime minister press conferences, or abstract discussions among trade experts. But, as a recent CITT case shows, maintaining free trade in practice sometimes is as simple as ensuring customs officials don't take cross-border traders for "administrative rides."
Globe and Mail Piece Highlights the Hurdles that can Throw a Wrench Even in the Canada-U.S. Trading Relationship, One of the World's Most Successful Trading Relations
The Globe and Mail reports on Frito Lay, a division of PepsiCo and makers of Cheetos, legal victory over the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) at the Canada International Trade Tribunal (CITT). Unless The dispute: In 2007 Frito Lay realized that it brought in Cheetos under the wrong tariff classification and fixed it. The financial impact? Well there shouldn't have been any. The Cheetos went in as cardboard boxes, which incur no duties, and then were corrected to reflect cornchips, which are also duty-free under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Frito properly made the correction, but the revenue-neutral correction triggered, in the words of the CITT, "an administrative ride" that resulted in Frito Lay apparently paying hundreds of thousands in cross-border duties:
“It was Kafkaesque, and it lasted for years,” explained Peter Kirby, a Montreal trade lawyer who represented Frito-Lay in the case. “You’re guilty, but of what? What are you accused of? It kept shifting.”
The tribunal says the Canadian government must now refund Frito-Lay hundreds of thousands of dollars in duties that should never have been collected.... “There may be political will to ease the administrative burden of trading across the border, but sometimes that message doesn’t filter down to the agencies charged with overseeing the movement of goods,” Mr. Kirby of law firm Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP said in an interview.
“Perhaps politicians should be making a greater effort to get people focused on easing the flow of goods.”
Even now, Mr. Kirby is at a loss to explain why Canadian border officials chose to play hardball with Frito Lay for so long. He doesn’t know if it was a money grab or merely an effort by the CBSA to flex its administrative muscles against a powerful U.S. multinational.
Looking at the CITT Decision
After reading the decision, I have to agree with Kirby's description of Frito Lay's experience with the CBSA.
For those of you interested in reading the opinion, I wouldn't read it in chronological order. Start with the background, and then shift to paragraphs 58 to 66 and, most importantly, read footnotes 26-29.
Barrie McKenna's summary is admirable, but the one thing that comes through in reading the decision is just how Byzantine tariff classifications, duty-impositions, and tariff re-classifications processes can be.
In short, Frito Lay corrected incorrect tariff classifications, classifications which had no impact on duty payments--both the incorrect and correct classifications were duty-free. CBSA then performed a bureaucratically elegant bob: ducking Frito Lay's correct by accepting the tariff re-classification, but denying the "amended tariff treatment... ." CBSA's supposed legal basis: Frito Lay failed to make this correction within a 1-year window.
The problem with that? It sure looks like an obvious misreading of Canadian border regulations. From the CITT decision, "[No authority was provided for such a purported 'one-year filing time limit', and the Tribunal knows of none." (Para. 61).
But the result still stood: CBSA slapped Frito Lay with hundreds of thousands of dollars in duties.
Frito Lay, in order to have CBSA review its tariff treatment rejection decision, paid the duties and then made several filings in Sept. 2007 for CBSA to review its decision. (Footnote 26).
The response? Radio silence (i.e. Frito Lay didn't get a response since CBSA took the "blanket position that none of the corrections to the tariff treatment...had any merit whatsoever" and left the matter "pending for several years."). (Footnote 29).
And this only gets to part of the administrative headache CBSA created for Frito Lay: it broke down the Cheetos shipments in five categories (even though they represented the same reclassification issue), and treated them in five different ways.
Hilariously, the first category of Cheetos "represent the manner in which the Tribunal believed that the... [other four categories] should have been treated, but unfortunately were not." (Para. 38).
Conclusion: A Successful, if Slow-Moving, Example of Free Trade Administration Oversight
Now, perhaps CBSA has a stronger case for its tariff imposition of these years-old Cheetos shipments. And it can make them in the appeal it has the right to file within 90 days of the December 21, 2011 decision. (Note: While the decision was issued on Dec. 21, 2011, the reasons were issued January 8, 2012.)
But this case shows that maintaining liberalized trade takes more than head-of-state consultations, treaties, and successful political votes. Liberalized trade also requires a well-functioning customs operation, and when it comes to this less-than-glamorous topic, giving cross-border traders effective legal means to challenge customs decisions is critical to a well-functioning border.
But Frito Lay is a trade juggernaut, a division of a large multi-national corporation that can absorb tariff classifications, fight them in court for years, and then even merit the national of national press. What about smaller traders?
Naturally, one case should never color the overall reputation of any agency. But the case does showcase the critical role legal mechanism have in preserving liberalized trade--not the mention the considerable impact tariffs can have on trade. The CBSA's incorrect actions resulted in Frito Lay being hit with a 11 percent duties fee, as opposed to the duty-free treatment its Cheetos should have received. (Footnote 26).
And, on the plus side, regardless of the considerable time it took, the decision represents a successful example of free trade administrative oversight. Finally, you can read the entire decision below.
By Keith Edmund White, Editor-in-Chief Building off of last week's post exploring the growing aboriginal rights grassroots movement Idle No More, there are a few headlines that are worth highlighting.
Harper to Meet with First Nations Chiefs Friday. Harper will hold a meeting with aboriginal leaders, including the face of the Idle No More movement Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence, Friday. And Governor General David Lloyd Johnston will be attending.
Harper Faces Federal Court Defeats on Cases Related to Aboriginal Issues. Two recent court decisions show some of the issues driving the Idle No More social movement. From o.canada.com's Natalie Stechyson:
Treaties, land rights and economic opportunities are all on the agenda for the meeting Friday that comes almost a year to the day after a landmark gathering in Ottawa designed to renew and review the relationship between the Crown and First Nations.
That relationship has been tested in court, with the Federal Court the focus of two cases Tuesday, including a ruling in one that said Metis and non-status Indians should be considered “Indians” under the Constitution Act, thus falling under federal jurisdiction. The ruling ended a 13-year legal battle.
While the court didn’t say exactly how the government must work with Metis and non-status Indians, it expected that off-reserve aboriginals would have just as much right to consult with the government over proposed legislation as do those on-reserve.
In the second case, two Alberta-based First Nations are taking the Harper government to court over its budget legislation, adding another layer to the actions aboriginals have taken across the country to protest Bills C-45 and C-38. The chief of one of the First Nations at the centre of the case, said the request for judicial review was a separate and distinct process from Idle No More, the actions of hunger-striking chief Theresa Spence, and the meeting Friday.
Making Friday's Meeting Successful. What constitutes success for Friday's meeting? The National Post offers an insightful editorial from University of Calgary professor and former chief of staff to the minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development from 2006-2008 Jean-SébastienRioux:
Leaving aside the specific controversies surrounding Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence’s hunger strike, or whether Idle No More’s criticisms of omnibus Bill C-45 have merit, let us focus on the upcoming meeting between Prime Minister Stephen Harper and aboriginal leaders on January 11. What would constitute success? What could move the file in a productive direction, for both the government and First Nations?
I have some insight into these issues, having served as the chief of staff to Jim Prentice, Prime Minister Harper’s first Indian Affairs and Northern Development Minister (as the Department was then called), after the Conservatives formed government in early 2006. We dealt with all these difficult issues then, including the backlash from “cancelling” Paul Martin’s Kelowna Accord, which promised $5-billion in cash to First Nation, Inuit and Métis leaders days before the December 2005 writ.
There were successes, and they were built on a policy of keeping the channels of communication open, and continuing to meet with aboriginal leaders through thick and thin. Prentice led the federal plan to improve water quality on reserves; matrimonial real property legislation was introduced to protect the rights of women who divorced on reserve; settlement of comprehensive claims in British Columbia, including Tsawwassen and Maa-nulth, were concluded — with more to come. And, of powerful symbolic importance was the agreement to settle the sad legacy of Residential Schools.
So, while many of today’s issues seem intractable, success in advancing tough files can be achieved with the right set of people at the table, and through perseverance.
...
To return to the original question: What would constitute success on Friday?
First of all, the Prime Minister and national aboriginal leaders should refocus the broadly-titled agenda items: No one can honestly tackle “Inherent Aboriginal and Treaty Rights” in one gathering. Focusing on, say, economic development would be a practical solution.
Within a known set of parameters, such as the budgetary envelope for the next five years, a joint AFN-Government of Canada Task Force with a strong mandate could be appointed to write a plan to engage the country’s most significant untapped labour force by the end of this calendar year. Start with a pilot project and engage successful First Nations leaders in the process as advisors and mentors (one can think of Chief Clarence Louie of Osoyoos; Chief Darcy Bear of the Whitecap Dakota First Nation; and many others).
The danger is that the “grassroots” movement may spin out of control. The government needs the AFN to be a legitimate interlocutor, and both sides need to keep channels open and keep working together to find solutions to the difficult problems facing First Nations. Only the demonstration of progress — not just its promise — will quell the Idle No More movement.
Attawapiskat First Nations Faces Audit, Distraction or Real Issue? And CTV offers an interview with aboriginal activist Ellen Gabriel, who discusses the Idle No More movement in general and responds to the federal audit of Attawapiskat First Nations. Theresa Spence is chief of Attawapiskat First Nations.
This Monday the United States and Canada increased and matched the value thresholds for “expedited customs clearance” to CDN$2,500 and USD$2,500 respectively. Canada also announced that their border agency would match America’s level for low-value shipments that are exempt from NAFTA Certificate of Origin requirements.
-bypasses surety bond requirements, -gets a faster clearance process, and -enjoys a reduced Merchandise Process Fee (MPF) of $2, instead of $25 (assuming e-filing).
And this regulatory change represents smart regulatory modernization for 4 reasons...
Two growing news-stories with two very different routes to prominence.
In Canada the Idle No More movement, which started as a series of teach-ins, has now turned into a growing social movement propelled by Chief Theresa Spence's hunger strike. After 23 days of nothing more than fish borth and herbal tea, Spence still remains strong in her demand: a meeting with Prime Minister Harper.
And in the United States, what was thought to be the end of 'Drama-Filled December' with the fiscal cliff resolved has been jolted by reaction to Speaker Boehner's decision to not permit a vote of Senate-passed Hurricane disaster relief legislation.
Idle No More Aboriginal Movement Is Growing, But to What End?
CTVNews.ca and Jordan Press at Canada.com offer a good primer for the Idle No More Movement.
Attention to the growing movement was sparked in part by Chief Theresa Spence, who launched a hunger strike last month in a bid to secure a face-to-face meeting with Stephen Harper. Spence has taken up residence on Victoria Island in the Ottawa River, wanting to discuss issues at Attawapiskat, her First Nations community located on James Bay.
Spence is also calling for a new relationship between the federal government and First Nations peoples.
Her hunger strike stretched into Day 23 on Wednesday, with Spence vowing to survive on nothing more than fish broth and herbal tea until a meeting is set.
The broader Idle No More movement urges the federal government to honour historic treaty agreements, and organizers are concerned that Bill C-45 -- the omnibus federal budget bill which they say erodes aboriginal rights -- was drafted with no input from aboriginal leaders.
Rail blockades have already taken place in Quebec and Ontario as demonstrations take place around the world, and Spence’s spokespeople said Wednesday in a written statement that the situation “is becoming more volatile.”
The statement added that chiefs who met in Ottawa last week plan to launch “countrywide economic disturbances” if Prime Minister Stephen Harper doesn’t meet with Spence.
On social media, activists were calling for blockades of border crossings on Saturday “to show the government that we are willing to escalate this to a point where we shut down the country.”
The movement, which started as a series of teach-ins on a small Saskatchewan reserve, has grown into a national movement that is now receiving international attention. Spence has become a focal point for Idle No More, subsiding on nothing more than fish broth and water since Dec. 11. She has said she’ll starve herself to death if Harper doesn’t meet with her, but has also suggested that a meeting between the government and native chiefs to discuss treaty concerns would suffice.
Harper has so far not said if he will meet with Spence. Aboriginal Affairs Minister John Duncan has offered to meet with Spence, but she has declined his offers.
On New Year’s Day, a close aide to Spence sent a letter to the founders of Idle No More which quotes Spence as saying that chiefs “must humble themselves and be one with the brave grassroots citizens of our nations.
But Keith Beardsley at HuffingtonPost.ca questions whether the Idle No More continued demand for a meeting with Harper may preclude the best outcome: both PM Harper and Chief Spence to have a face-saving way to improve the the challenges facing First Nations People.
From Beardsley's column where he urges Harper to meet with National Chief Shawn Atleo and former Prime Minister Joe Clark, and for Chief Spence to declare victory--steps which then allow both sides to begin substanial dialogue:
Chief Spence has succeeded in galvanizing First Nations communities, activists and youth to take action. Her efforts have helped the "Idle No more" movement which started in Saskatchewan, to take root and grow into a national movement. The movement will not go away any time soon and it is something both the present and future Canadian governments, as well as the First Nations leadership will have to deal with. There is more than enough here for Chief Spence to declare victory. The Prime Minister also needs a face-saving victory. No national government regardless of its political stripe can be seen to give into a protest for the precedent it will set. He too, needs a way out. Victory for Harper will be one where he can say he did not give in to the protest.
Harper needs to reach out beyond his inner circle, cabinet and departmental advisors. Their advice is stale and hasn't worked so far.
...
Solutions exist, but both sides have to show flexibility, they also need a win-win situation. Both sides want to improve living conditions for First Nations, both sides also want increased opportunities for First Nations, especially for the youth. Who then will be the first to offer a hand in friendship this time and allow the dialogue to begin?
U.S. House Speaker's Sandy Misstep (and now mending): Growing Criticism Over Boehner's Decision to Not Bring Senate-Passed Hurricane Sandy Relief Bill to a Vote
This morning on the House Floor, and now with New Jersey Governor's press conference this afternoon, the excoriations of House Speaker Boehner's decision to pull Sandy relief legislation is growing, and getting more and more play throughout the cable news echo-chamber.
Christie's powerful opening statement at his press conference two hours ago included:
"Last night politics was placed before our oath to serve our citizens. For me, it was disappointing and disgusting to watch...Last night the House of Representatives failed that most basic test of public service, and they did so with callous indifference to the suffering of the people of my state."
Why has passing the Sandy bill so hard for Boehner? Well, no one seems entirely sure--apparently there was a commitment to vote on the bill that then fizzled. But FOXNews says the complaints from Republicans--particularly House Rep. Peter King and Christie--may be for show:
Less than an hour after Christie’s press conference, Republican lawmakers confirmed that the backlash against Boehner was mostly for show, announcing that the Speaker promised a vote on the Sandy aid package on Friday.
Rep. Peter King, R-NY, who earlier Wednesday said that anyone donating money to House Republicans is “out of their mind”, told reporters that he planned to back Boehner for Speaker again.
Update: Boehner mends fences by agreeing to two votes on January 15, reports The Hill:
Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has agreed to hold two votes on Hurricane Sandy aid after coming under withering fire from New York and New Jersey Republicans.
The House will vote to provide $9 billion to shore up the National Flood Insurance Program on Friday and will vote on another $51 billion Sandy spending package on Jan. 15, according to GOP aides after a meeting between Boehner and GOP lawmakers from the affected states.
