Over the last decade, businesses have been emphasising the need to increase international regulatory cooperation, thus harmonising requirements and eliminating "nontariff trade barriers". At its best, such cooperation opens markets and promotes exports. As a result, it contributes to economic growth and job creation, and it can save consumers a lot of money.
Source: CRT Digital Library, http://crtlibrary.cbt.org/items/show/125
Editor-in-Chief A local Washington State paper, talks Columbia River Treaty (CRT) renewal, detailing the ecological pressures that accompany updating
a 20th century power generation-flood control treaty to reflect 21st
century concerns. But are renewal talks over CRT, a treaty that whose expiration clock starts running in 2014,
more likely to stumble over financial terms?
Then again, will this impressive water-management/power generation treaty, which stretches from British Columbia to Montana, be able to adapt to ecological concerns or the demands of Native peoples on both sides of the border? Keith White discusses the CRT's impressive 50-year evolution.
The Columbia River Treaty: 'Kaiser City' Floods, 50 Years Canada-U.S. Flood and
Power Cooperation Starts
In May 1948, a ten-foot high deluge inundated the city of Vanport, then the second-largest city in Oregon locate between Portland
and Vancouver. The Vanport Flood not only
washed a city (striking “Kaiser City” from the U.S. cultural lexicon), but
ushered in a impressive treaty where the United States swapped power generation in return for Canada providing regional flood control. (Page jump after the photo)
Source: CRT 2014/2024 Review-Recent U.S. Entity Study Results available in full below.
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.
In fact, if the country’s assorted Liberal parties are in the mood for advice from the “department of easier said than done,” they should waste no more time seeking to present themselves as the middle ground between extremes. Instead they should find some extreme worth defending. What social end is so important that it’s worth taxing to achieve? What fights are worth fighting?
The decline of Liberal parties in Canada produces a kind of optical illusion. The centre isn’t disappearing, it is becoming crowded. Nothing about the Liberal name ensures the endurance of Liberal parties. Loyalty will not save them. Wit and heart will, or nothing will.
Two First Nations Tribes Territorial Dispute May Delay Major Canadian Wind-Energy Project. The Anishinabek and Batchewana tribes are arguing over their territorial lines, which were set by the Robinson Huron Treaty of 1850. At risk: the 36-turbine, 80 km/~50 mile Bow Lake Wind Farm Project. Check out The Globe and Mail’s report.
There are plenty of anecdotal examples of cyberespionage in the energy sector and some consider it part of the business.
“One of the companies we deal with makes power plants,” said a source familiar with the Canadian energy sector. “They built a power plant in China and all the intellectual property was stolen.”
CNOOC-Nexen Deal In the Greater Canada-China Economic Context. Conventional wisdom says that the CNOOC-Nexen deal will be approved. But the real story, at least according to Asia Pacific Foundation President and CEO Yuen Pau Woo, is what strings Canada puts on future Chinese acquisitions of Canadian companies. What I find surprising? Woo’s advocacy for ‘smart’ state economic planning in Canada. From The Globe and Mail:
An opportunity was missed a few years ago when there was a bidding war for Inco. At the end of a convoluted series of offers and counteroffers, two bidders were left standing – Vale of Brazil and Teck Resources of Vancouver. Vale was the much bigger player, and Teck’s offer came as a surprise. Since the acquisition was subject to government review, Ottawa had a chance to weigh in. Support for Teck would have resulted in a much enlarged Canadian company ranking in the top five of global mining giants.
But Vale prevailed, and another Canadian icon went into foreign hands. To be sure, Teck is Canada’s largest diversified mining company and still a global player, but an opportunity for a “national champion” to enter the top tier of mining companies was missed.
The point of this example is not to bemoan foreign ownership but to bring clarity to the goal of building national champions. Blocking foreign investment in and of itself won’t create globally significant Canadian companies. By the same token, a purely hands-off approach to market transactions is no guarantee of success. If this sounds complicated, it’s because economic statecraft is complicated. Beware of those who would boil it down to just a few easy rules.
Detroit-Windsor Crossing: Harper’s Hard Press & Michigan’s Messy Ballot Battle. The Harper government, in their proposed 2013 budget, is exempting a second-planned bridge crossing between Windsor and Detroit from environmental review. We’ll see if that sticks, or if the NDP or Liberals can make political hay out of it. But, perhaps more importantly, Michigan voters may decide the pace any new international crossing is made—and it’s bringing out colorful local politics. The owner of the Ambassador Bridge, Manuel ‘Matty’ Moroun, is pushing Proposal 6, which—if passed—could create legal hurdles for the planned construction of the Detroit River International Crossing Project. And he seems happy to deal for votes from both ends of the political spectrum. Will an international bridge crossing be tangled by an unlikely coalition of ballot voters this November? And how is this issue, unlike the Keystone XL pipeline, not getting any national political attention? From The Windsor Star:
Critics say Moroun already has a deal in play with the group Americans For Prosperity, buying the group’s support on Proposal 6 by bankrolling its campaign on Proposal 5 — a ballot initiative to limit taxes.
Last week, the Detroit Free Press reported on Moroun bartering with the United Auto Workers for the union’s support on Proposal 6 in exchange for Moroun financially backing Proposal 2 — the union’s ballot initiative on collective bargaining.
Reportedly under pressure, UAW leadership backed away from the deal, with union president Bob King saying the UAW would remain neutral on Proposal 6.
The UAW’s recent hints of support for Proposal 6 were made all the more embarrassing by the revelation that earlier this summer, King wrote a letter to the U.S. federal government extolling the benefits of a new bridge crossing.
In fact, if the country’s assorted Liberal parties are in the mood for advice from the “department of easier said than done,” they should waste no more time seeking to present themselves as the middle ground between extremes. Instead they should find some extreme worth defending. What social end is so important that it’s worth taxing to achieve? What fights are worth fighting?
Detroit-Windsor Crossing: Harper’s Hard Press & Michigan’s Messy Ballot Battle. The Harper government, in their proposed 2013 budget, is exempting a second-planned bridge crossing between Windsor and Detroit from environmental review. We’ll see if that sticks, or if the NDP or Liberals can make political hay out of it. But, perhaps more importantly, Michigan voters may decide the pace any new international crossing is made—and it’s bringing out colorful local politics. The owner of the Ambassador Bridge, Manuel ‘Matty’ Moroun, is pushing Proposal 6, which—if passed—could create legal hurdles for the planned construction of the Detroit River International Crossing Project. And he seems happy to deal for votes from both ends of the political spectrum. Will an international bridge crossing be tangled by an unlikely coalition of ballot voters this November? And how is this issue, unlike the Keystone XL pipeline, not getting any national political attention? From The Windsor Star: