Stephen Harper Highlights BTB in Interview with Robert Rubin

From the Council on Foreign Relations A Conversation with Stephen Harper's Q&A session:

GORDON GIFFIN: So my -- really, my question is, is there a chance of a much bigger initiative between our two countries at some point, to break down the anachronistic rules that impede economic efficiencies in North America, some of which have been done in Europe? I'm not talking about creating an EU with a large governance or anything, but the economic efficiencies.

Last thing I'll say, when I was in Canada working on things like this, I found the impediment to that to be an insecurity in Canada about dealing with the United States, that we were somehow going to assimilate Canada. I don't see that anymore. I think Canada's much more self-confident in dealing with the United States and the world. So if that's the case, is there a chance at doing a bigger deal going forward?

HARPER: Well, Gordon, let me just begin by just repeating -- I know you're familiar with it -- some of the things we are doing, because I think we do have some significant initiative going forward.
We have the -- what we call the Beyond the Border Initiative where we are attempting through a series of individual initiatives and investments and closer cooperation between border authorities, to make things more seamless at the border and to push a lot of -- you know, inspections out around the perimeter of North America to try and arrange our affairs so that, as we say things, are -- things are -- you know, may enter twice, but are inspected only once. And we're doing some of those things.

We also have a parallel initiative called the Regulatory Cooperation Council, where we've identified 29 areas to create greater consistency and harmonization of regulations and more importantly, in my judgment, especially for our side, is to find ways in those areas where we will prevent regulatory -- unnecessary regulatory difference and duplication going forward, where we try and identify some of those things in advance, try and change some of the processes.

And I should mention one very specific project of international cooperation, which is the president just issued a permit for the Detroit River International Crossing, which this is financed largely by Canada, but this will be -- this is a huge piece of infrastructure in what is -- and we often forget the size of this relationship -- what is the largest single trade corridor in the entire world, the Detroit-Windsor trade corridor.
So we have some important initiatives going forward. Could they lead to something systemically more integrated? Look, I think on our side, they could. I think on our side, they could. I agree with your assessment. I think the view -- we had a watershed election in 1988 over the free trade agreement with the United States, and the opponents argued that whether economic integration with the United States -- greater economic integration and trade would lead to wealth or not, it would cause Canada to lose its political independence and identity.

What we've seen is it has led to vast increases in cross-border trade without any such loss of political independence or identity. In fact, this past year, as you know, we've been celebrating the War of -- the War of 1812, which --
RUBIN: I know. (Chuckles.)

HARPER: -- permanently established this -- (laughter) -- this independence and separate identity. So I think that -- there will always be opponents in Canada, but I think that is a real minority view now.

I think the resistance to this kind of thing's far more in the United States than in Canada, for reasons that -- and maybe, Bob and others, for reasons you would better fathom than me. 

Some of it's post-9/11 security concerns, but I've never seen -- the United States in the past decade is -- the sensitivity here about sovereignty and the negative assessments I often read of NAFTA -- completely counterfactual assessments of NAFTA -- I think, are the real barriers. I think the real barrier to making some of these arrangements broader and more systemic in terms of the integration are actually on this side of the border.

BTB 2.0? Stakeholders Crowdsourcing Site Promises Increased Collaboration and New Ideas for BtB and RCC

From BtBObserver, who reports on the new BtB crowdsourcing site Idea Scale: 

Have an idea to make the Canada-U.S. economic and border relationship run smoother? Crossborder stakeholders want to hear your ideas. And they may just shape the work of the Beyond the Border (BtB) Initiative and the Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC).

Pacific Northwest Economic Region (PNWER), Canadian American Business Council, U.S. Chamber and other US-Canada partnering organizations have launched Idea Scale, a crowdsharing website where crossborder enthusiasts can post and comment on ideas to improve the Canada-U.S. regulatory relationship.

Check out Idea Scale here.  Whether sharing ideas or just monitoring the mystical art of crossborder regulatory transformation, the site is definitely worth regular visits.

BTBObserver Highlights Evolving Canada-U.S. Economic Relationship

The Canada-U.S. trade relationship is still going strong, it's just changing.

From Woodrow Wilson's Beyond the Border Observer, highlighting a profound take-away from a Financial Post article detailing a still-strong Canada-U.S. trading relationship:

Wednesday’s Financial Post has a fascinating piece on the importance and changing nature the Canada-U.S. economic relationship.  With so much attention paid to diversifying Canada’s trade portfolio, its importance to emphasis the unique and lasting value a close Canada-U.S. economic partnership has for both nations.

The driving question in Canada-U.S. trade isn’t whether Canada and the United States look for new traders partners.  Rather, it’s whether they harness their relationship in order to succeed in the 21st century global marketplace.

Beyond the Border Newswrap: Putting Canadian Press BTB Worries in Context

By Keith Edmund White
Editor-in-Chief

So Beyond the Border (BTB) is in the news--well, the Canadian news.

And, from these reports, you might think BTB is entering an avoidable, but troubling, crash-landing trajectory.

But are these articles missing the forest for the trees?

The Nation, Drama-Free Reporting, and U.S. Northern Border Security

By Keith Edmund White

Editor-in-Chief

A response to Todd Miller's recent piece in The Nation, and the dangers of histrionics in writing about the Canada-U.S. border.

Todd Miller paints an fascinating, if incomplete and somewhat falsely alarmist, view of America's emerging approach to border security.  

Miller deserves credit for highlighting what could be a troubling trend in border arrests--only 1 percent of border arrests (in Rochester) being of a person of "fair" complexion. 

Sure, the numbers sure seem cherry-picked, but Miller does deserve credit for highlighting what may be a serious problem of race and security border.

It's the rest of the article that has me concerned.

Walling the Border...What?

From Miller's article:

Bert Tussing, US Army War College Homeland Defense and Security Director, realizes that when people think of border security, what immediately comes to mind is the US-Mexico border. After all, he is speaking in El Paso, Texas, where in the early 1990s the massive transformation and expansion of the border enforcement apparatus was born. Operation Blockade (later renamed Operation Hold-the-Line) became the Clinton administration’s blueprint for the walls, double-fencing, cameras, sensors, stadium lighting and concentration of Border Patrol agents now seen in urbanized areas—and some rural ones as well—from Brownsville, Texas, to San Diego, California. Tussing believes that this sort of intense surveillance, which has literally deformed communities throughout the southwest, should be brought to the northern border as well.

My thoughts:  Before we start seeing dysoptian images of America turning into West (or East?) Berlin, let's take a beat. Canada and America's trade relationship, wherever walls may or may not be, can't afford further delays at the border. And there are some areas--the Great Lakes, for example--where I don't think anyone would mind greater scrutiny of the goods that are traded and the people who may be crossing back and forth. Whether organized crime or terrorism, this seems like smart policy.

The Private-Public Hybrid to Border Security: An Issue that Merits Our Attention

From Miller's article:

A former Marine with close-cropped brown hair, Tussing has a Napoleonic stature and despises being stuck behind a podium. “I kind of like moving around,” he quips before starting “The Changing Role of the Military in Border Security Operations,” his talk at last October’s Border Management Conference and Technology Expo.  

Perhaps Tussing realizes that his audience holds a new breed of border-security entrepreneur when his initial Army-Marine joke falls flat. Behind the small audience are booths from seventy-four companies selling their border-security wares. These nomadic malls of the surveillance state are popping up in ever more places each year. 

My thoughts:  Now this is interesting, and if Miller provided a bit more substance could have made a great article. What are the trade-offs with taking a hybrid public-private approach to border security? Are we paying more for a quick, but lower quality security net? Miller gets credit for implicitly raising these questions.

The Constitution-free zone:

From Miller's article:

That zone—up to 100 miles from any external US border—is the area that the Supreme Court has deemed a “reasonable distance” in which to engage in border security operations, including warrantless searches. As in the Southwest, expect more interior checkpoints where federal agents will ask people about their citizenship, as they did to Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy in 2008. In the zone, you have the developing blueprint for a country not only in perpetual lockdown, but also under increasing surveillance. According to the ACLU, if you were to include the southern border, the northern border and coastal areas in this zone, it would contain 200 million people, a potential “border” jurisdiction encompassing two-thirds of the US population.

My thoughts:  First, I have some real concerns with Miller running with the ACLU's label of "constitution free" border.  My off-putting ranting aside about the shallowness short-form reporting requires aside, I have a feeling this border zone doesn't allow the local cops or FBI of 200 million people to endure warrantless searches at the drop of a hat (err...badge).  But  I'll get back to this after consulting the ACLU and any other resources that might around.

Conclusion:  "Drama-Free" Need for Numbers & BTB

If the United States has been on a spending bulge to secure our northern border, the rational approach would be:  (1) look dispassionately at what has resulted from this security push and (2) are we getting our money's worth.

But budget and policy analysis aside, it seems that--at the very least--the United States, if it's--in Miller's view--is throwing money at private contractors, planning to seal off our nation, and taking away almost half of the public constitutional rights, shouldn't we at least put a tiny fraction of that money into ways to improve Canada-U.S. trade so that we can create more jobs.

Oh, and we already have a blueprint for that:  the Beyond the Border Initiative.

If I'm going to live in a "constitution-free" zone, might as well get the advantage of cheaper pork at the market, a job to buy it, and then the surplus income to buy (another) flat-screen TV.

Presidents of a Canadian & U.S. Association of CEOs Praise BTB, Offer Roadmap for Further Progress in Canada-U.S. Economic Relations

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.

Check out the full The Hill editorial by John Engler and John Manley here. 

 For a quick summary, read below or check out Beyond the Border Observer:

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… .”

NORAD Next: One of the Most Successful, Evolving Binational Security Agreements Charts Out Its 21st Century Role

By Keith Edmund White, Editor-in-Chief

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.)

From Donna Miles at American Forces Press Service, reporting on the recent meeting of the Permanent Board of Defense:

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.

NORAD has an impressive history of adapting to changing times. From NORAD in 2012 – Ever Evolving, Forever Relevant by Lieutenant-General Tom Lawsonwith Michael Sawler: 

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. 

To get a sense of just how much NORAD has adapted over its over 50-year existence, check out this 1976 speech by Lieutenant Colonel Povilus: 

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: 

• Cybersecurity. A key part of the BTB Action plan, NORAD and U.S. Northern Command launched a joint cybersecurity division last May.
• 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. 

Beyond the Border Meat Pre-clearance Prong Hits a Snag

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.

And the XL Foods beef recall, which lead to four Canadians getting sick, has given the advocacy group Food & Water Watch powerful ammunition in lobbying against the pilot program.  

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.

BTB: Bilateralist Reports on Progress, and (Relative) Risk to North American Exporters

Luiza Ch. Savage, at her blog Bilateralist and at Mclean's D.C. correspondent, shared an excellent BTB update chart prepared by Birgit Matthiesen that details and has and has not been accomplished by the governments of Canada and the United States.

You can find Matthiesen's 2-page side-by-side comparison here, and Savage's Maclean's article here.

Savage, not getting buried in details, succinctly gets to the 'impact' of differing rates of success on BTB's various objectives:

This is complicated stuff and no one expects overnight changes. But timing matters, too. For example, the governments reported progress on a pilot projects for harmonizing cargo screening for North-America-bound cargo at the ports of Prince Rupert and Montreal. There is a risk that quick progress on such“perimeter” elements coupled with slow progress on expediting the land border between Canada and the U.S. could inadvertently disadvantage North American manufacturers relative to exporters from, say, Asia or Europe.

Says Birgit Matthiesen, the Washington representative for the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters:

“With the increased competition from third countries in the last few years, and what is anticipated from the TPP and Canada-EU trade agreement, manufacturers in Canada and the U.S., and their business partners, are going to be looking for real relief from transactional costs and compliance burdens at the land border. If not, the North American supply chain could be at a competitive disadvantage.”

BTB RCC Wrap Up, Next Week, and Shameless Self-Promotion

By Keith Edmund White, Editor-in-Chief

Exciting Posts Next Week & Shameless Self-Promotion 

Readers, please forgive the delay in postings.  We have a slate of blog postings and expert Q&As in the hopper for next week.

In the meantime, CUSLINexus will engage in some self-promotion.  Check out Keith Edmund White's recent postings for Beyond the Border Observer blog:

Week in Review:  BTB and the Regulatory Cooperation Council,
BTB Delivers:  Pilot Program Offers Faster Border Commutes for Trusted Traders

BTB and RCC Progress Reports

And, keeping up with the BTB & RCC theme, readers should know that the first annual progress reports were released on these bi-national joint initiatives to enhance border security and cross-border trade. 

The BTB progress report can be found here, and the RCC progress report can be found here.

And read Keith's post on these reports at Woodrow Wilson Center's Beyond the Border Observer blog.

More BTB & RCC Resources

For more information on the status of these two important bi-national efforts, check out the following sites:

Canada and United States report progress on perimeter security and economic competitiveness, Prime Minister of Canada, 12/14/12
White House Releases Report on Beyond the Border and Regulatory Cooperation Council with Canada, The White House, 12/14/12
Beyond the Border, 2013:  Inching Toward a Deal, iPolitics, Colin Robertson, 12/12/2012
Beyond public view:  Harper's Beyond the Border initiative a year later, rabble.ca, Stuart Trew, 12/13/2012
Beyond the Border website
Regulatory Cooperation Council website

BTB & Facilitating Cross-Border Trade: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back?

By Keith Edmund White, Editor-in-Chief

Good news:  The Beyond the Border Initiative (BTB) and the Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC) make the news! 

Bad news:  Facilitating cross-border trade and securing the border is tough work.

The Financial Post's thoughtful piece lays out the following Canada-U.S. border economic hurdles:

• Regulatory symmetry > customs issues when it comes to barriers for small to medium sized businesses engaged in cross-border trade.  Why's this important?  The success of the Regulatory Cooperation Council, a two-year project to bring greater symmetry along Canada-U.S. regulatory standards, means the success of businesses on both sides of the border.      
• Attempts to cut-down on border custom wait times shifts compliance issues to shipping, favoring bigger companies who (a) have greater awareness of fast-track programs and (b) possess the advanced tax remittance systems these programs require.

From the November 27th article by Denise Deveau:

The Beyond the Border initiative signed between Canada and the U.S. last year, has as many proponents as it does detractors. While most industry observers support the spirit behind the initiative, when it comes to the transfer of goods across the border, there are noticeable gaps between theory and practical application.

...

Because customs has pushed back border requirement compliance to the shippers, the pressure is actually moving further back into the supply chain, he adds. “If they don’t make an investment in systems that comply, then it’s too bad. Customs would argue, why should we worry about releasing your goods if you don’t make the data available to us?”

...

To date, only larger companies have been able to achieve the status because they are the only ones with the sophisticated tax remittance systems required to qualify. “Beyond the Border is supposed to make it easier for anyone to use it,” Ms. Wagner explains. “But there is a lack of awareness on the part of importers that programs are available and not limited to large entities.”

The lack of awareness and slow uptake will make it increasingly difficult for non-“trusted trader” players to compete, she says. “For Beyond the Border to work, we need that uptake. Otherwise it’s too much investment for too little payoff for businesses.”

...

The data argument may be the most high-profile topic to date, but according to Joy Nott, president and CEO of I.E. Canada (Canadian Association of Importers and Exporters) in Toronto, there’s a much bigger one that dwarfs everything else: harmonizing the overall regulatory environment between Canada and the U.S. 

“That’s far bigger than the data elements that customs wants. In fact it has nothing to do with data, and everything to do with standards.”