"With the Green Party’s intervention, it’s a good bet he’ll been looking at his second decade as PM soon."

By Keith Edmund White, Editor-in-Chief

Yes, Canada's Left is under-cutting itself.  But personality-politics should settle this question before Canada's next round of parliamentary election.  So, stop complaining about the Liberal-NDP divide, let alone the Greens delivering Harper another term as Prime Minister. Though, as The Real Story blog shows, is can make for entertaining reading.

The Real Story, a Canadian political blog, mocks a defense of having three centre-left political parties on Canada's national political scene.  With the NDP-Liberals-Greens all competing for seats in Canada's ridings, a divided Left is going to deliver Canada another two terms of Conservative Prime Minister Harper:

Because for all the Green Party’s disclaimers about vote splitting [(1) you owe it to your supporters to run & (2) non-voters will only come out if you show political alternatives] one truth remains.

The truth – and Calgary Centre proves it – is that three parties on the centre left is useful to only one person in Canada. And that’s Stephen Harper. With the Green Party’s intervention, it’s a good bet he’ll been looking at his second decade as PM soon.

TRS isn't alone in this assessment, though it's logic-evisceration of Chris Turner's, the Green's candidate in Calgary by-election last week--op-ed claiming he didn't throw the election to the Conservatives is particularly delicious. 

But, first, it's entirely too early for all this belly-aching.  There are years before the next election..

Second, when you look at recent national polling, Canada' voters--not politicians--need to settle the Left divide.  The Liberals and Greens are painstacking close in popular support, and as long as that holds up, how do you expect an insurgent political party to tell members to lose prestige in the main of winning an election they could still win on their own?  

And, in any case, the Greens won't make the difference nationally.

My advice:  Green and Liberals, show your policy and leadership differences and take a look at the polling in two years.

Last thought:  Personality-politics will settle this.  Thomas Mulcair's tenure as Leader of the Opposition should settle which party is the leader of the Left soon enough, one or the other.

U.S. Sunday Morning Political Show Highlight: Why Everyone Should Be Watching Bloomberg Government's Capital News

By Keith Edmund White, Editor-in-Chief

Bloomberg Government (or BGOV) has a new show, Capital Gains, which focuses on "business implications of government action." Hosted by Peter Cook, the show (1) adds depth to stories that talking heads usually just endlessly bandy about and (2) getting voices that wouldn't make the normal talk-show circuit but adds a needed viewpoint lacking from the national discussion.

In short, it's close to the web-news program I would one day would to produce.  And one you should watch. 

Side-note:  If BGOV and HuffPoTV teamed up, I think you could have, within 5 years, the first internet news channel that could compete and beat cable news for those who preferred Nate Silver's blog over ESPN this fall--and I know I would to watch it.

With so much focus on the emerging fiscal cliff, if you want a sense of how politicians are going to crunch the numbers of get past the ideologues carping more about strategy than policy, this is the show for you to watch.

Today Capital News/BGOV offers a fantastic segment with Aetna CEO on what a group of business leaders are advocating as part of a grand bargain, and a truly enlightening conversation with two Bloomberg number crunches on just how a fiscal deal can be reached--and common misconceptions of two leading ways to reign in Medicare spending.

The show re-airs on Bloomberg TV at noon and 5 PM, and I suspect by this evening or tomorrow morning, the full show will be available here.  In the meantime, watch some of the previous episodes.

In short, this is 'must-see' Sunday morning TV.

Want to know where to watch--online or otherwise--this fantastic program? From BGOV.com:

Bloomberg Government’s Capitol Gains airs Sunday mornings at 11:30AM EST on W*USA9 and on Bloomberg Television at 12:00PM EST and 5:00PM EST.

Follow Bloomberg Government and Peter Cook on Twitter at @BGov and @PeterCCook and follow the conversation at #CapitolGains.

FP Talks Canada-U.S. Territorial Disputes, Let's Add Some Legal Context

By Keith Edmund White, Editor-in-Chief

12/03/2012 Update:  Josh Keating was nice enough to put up with my good-natured sarcasm to tell me the Moot Court link provide below doesn't work.  Not sure why this is, but http://www.cusli.org/niagara/2010_2011_archive.html is the full site, and it's available through cusli.org.  [Full instructions:  go to cusli.org; put your mouse cursor over "Niagara" on the sites top banner; click "Archives"; and then,finally, click "2011"; at which point, you shall see the materials for the 2010-2011 Niaraga Moot Court Competition involving an Arctic martime dispute between Canada and the United States.]  Sorry for the technical difficulties.

FP's Joshua Keating blogs on outstanding Canada-U.S. territorial disputes.  He correctly notes that while Machias Island may be attracting the NYTimes attention--and that of Stephen R. Kelly of the Center for Canadian Studies at Duke University--that the perhaps issue may be emerging maritime claims between these two strong allies.

Craving more than a Wikipedia listing of disputes, and some legal analysis for how two of these issues may be resolved?  Check out CUSLI's archives for the 2011 Niagara International Moot Court.  It's a fascinating moot case, written by CWRU law professor Michael Scharf, dealing with the legal status of the emerging Northwest Passage and the Canadian-U.S. Beaufort Sea territorial disputes.

P.S.  Law students, take heart, while you can't use Wikipedia as a source, FP bloggers can.  Yes, this should be mocked, especially since spending another 30 seconds Googling would have found this much better graphic and article from The Globe and Mail which is sampled below: 

Ontario’s Municipal Pension Fund Start-Up Wiz on Keeping Canada Competitive

The Globe and Mail talks with John Ruffolo, chief executive officer for the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS) venture capital arm.  Starting in 2011, OMERS started direct start-up capital investing—an “unusual” and “aggressive march” for a pension fund to take.

The topic:  How Canada can keep competing on the global stage.

This is an excellent interview, shows how capital and manufacturing growth and government pensions interact, and gives Canadian policy makers some solid advice. 

Two big-take aways:  (1) Canada may soon be making a positive, “game-changing” immigration shift, and (2) Canada needs to be more like Sweden and Israel, less like Germany: make strategic bests in manufacturing, and don’t try to compete in all fields.

Naturally, the question is in the details:  How do you adopt a strategic manufacturing plan that also protects one-self from manufacturing sector up and downs.  At least Canada has energy to lean on for the foreseeable future.

From the must-read interview: 

Is Canada indeed lacking innovation to become competitive, as some critics say?

I don’t think so. I think that purely from an innovation engineering part of development, I would put Canada up against anywhere in the world. When I’m down in the [Silicon] Valley, they talk about the Canadian engineers, particularly from Waterloo, [Ont]. I was stunned. This is from the top [venture capital] investors in the world.

Innovation isn’t the issue. The issue really is, how do we get more of these folks building companies, to get them the support to be successful. That support includes capital, mentorship, government support. Every country is trying to compete against Silicon Valley.

Right now, I would say the issue for Canadian competitiveness is that the days of Canada thinking we can compete in all industries, at all levels, are over.

With globalization, Canada is going to have to make very strategic choices of where it’s going to focus and innovative industries is one of those. It also means that you’re also not going to be able to do some things that traditionally Canada has supported. And that’s part of the problem [with convincing governments]. It’s very anti-votes. The voters right now tend to be in traditional industries.

…

What should Canada do in terms of public policy to create more and better startups?

…

But the bigger one they’re working on – and I think it’s is going to be far more effective – is looking at immigration policy. They’re working on two immigration policies that I think could be game-changing. One is called a startup visa, and the other one is called the immigration investor program.

Both are designed to get foreign capital into Canadian technology companies and to get more foreign talent here working in Canadian technology companies. One of Canada’s assets is its diversity of people. Now this to me is really smart. … Talent is the No. 1 issue for companies that are growing in Canada. We asked all of our portfolio companies what is the No. 1 issue that you want help from us on. And it was technical engineering talent. Every one. This is going to be key to our future.

…

What countries are getting it right in terms of fostering innovation and global competitiveness?

Germany is one, but look at Israel. For a country that has such a small population, they are very focused. They are a big startup nation. They are strong in high technology, related to the military and defence. In 1989, when the wall fell, millions of Russian Jews, extremely well educated in the sciences, moved to Israel and it created the most massive influx of brain power in a very narrow area of their history. … A number of venture capital firms, largely U.S.-based, were attracted to come to Israel to provide the fuel necessary for these companies to grow.

You see it with advanced manufacturing from Germany, Israel in innovation and Sweden in telecommunications. Sweden very narrowly focused in on the wireless industry. Countries that don’t have the requisite population have no choice but to do that. If you are Brazil, China and the United States, do them all.

TPP Backup Plan? Zoellick, Looking to NAFTA's Success, Pushes an Americas U.S. Trade Agenda for the United State

Zoellick to policy-makers:  "North America can become a new raising power" if the U.S. adopts the right trade approach.  

Former World Bank President Robert Zoellick (and, most recently, head Mitt Romney's national security transition team) pushes an Americas trading block to secure America’s future economic growth, looking to build on the extensive ties between the United States, Canada, and Mexico as a starting block to push closer U.S. trade ties to Brazil.

Could this be Zoellick pushing a back-up plan for the White House should Trans-Pacific Partnership talks falter or delay?

And, before we delve into a condensed summary of the op-ed, could Zoellick's "Americas trade vision" be merged with the in-sourcing phenomenon reported so superbly in Charles Fishman's Atlantic article The Insourcing Boom?

From Zoellick's WaPo editorial:

This is an excellent time to deepen ties. The NAFTA countries should invest in a North American community that would make each stronger at home and around the world. For the United States, a more prosperous, growing, populous, integrated, energy-secure and democratic continental base would enhance private-sector possibilities and national power.

…

North America should work to better connect the trade, sourcing and supply chains in the Americas — and act with hemispheric partners on the next generation of development issues: investment, infrastructure, education, energy, the environment, service sectors, business facilitation, or even democracy and security. 

These Latin American partners can also help shape ideas around the world during a time of great fluidity. Chile, Peru, Colombia and Mexico — all U.S. FTA partners—have created a new Pacific group that is advancing policies for open economies. They can be U.S. friends in a changing Asia-Pacific system, too.

U.S. ties with Brazil are not part of this FTA framework. Yet the current governors of Brazil’s states seem inclined to pursue more interests with the United States, including on energy, inclusive development and democracy. By combining activities with Brazil and partnerships across the hemisphere, the United States could set the stage for economic and security ties among all American democracies.

As the president looks west across the Pacific and is pulled to the Mideast, he also needs a fresh north-south vision. North America can become a new rising power. And the foundation of the future global system can be “Made in the Americas.”

Evening News Wrap

By Keith Edmund White, Editor-in-Chief

So, yes, this is a gross simplification of a BIG BIG week in news.  But we got news at the belly-aches in both nations' legal professions, tax-carping, election-updates, trade, top Canadian fiction, and more!

Canada-U.S. News

Life, death, and taxes…and Extraterritorial Application of U.S. Law in Canada.  Canada and the United States are in tax treaty talks, and it seems like Canadian banks are going to have to deal with the administrative burden of checking if their clients are dual citizens.  The lurking issue: dual citizens in Canada avoiding U.S. taxes.

Canada’s Late Entry to the TPP…Not a Huge Worry, But There’s Still Reason to Worry.  While slamming subsidies U.S. states use to lure companies, and how they hurt Canadian merchants, Peter Clark—in this detailed review of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade talks, it’s impact on Canada, and the global economy—says (1) Canada doesn’t have much to fear with it’s late arrival to the TPP and (2) concludes:

“It’s far too early to either dismiss TPP as a useless exercise or embrace it as a cure for what ails the global economy. While we see problems now, they can be fixed, with flexibility and compromise. If the TPP is a wine, it clearly needs some ageing before we can properly pass verdict on it quality.”

Canada News

Bye, Bye By-Elections!  Mark Abley, at The Gazette, talks on Monday’s by-elections in Canada, arguing that while Canada’s Conservative lost ground, a united Left is the only way to see a change in Ottawa.  Monday’s by-election results in brief: Conservatives held on to seats in Calgary-Centre and Durham, with a NDP-Green battle in Victoria going the NDP’s ways.

CETA Imbalance?  So What?  Paul Wells, taking note of imbalance concerns regarding Canada-EU trade talks, defends progress on the deal.  And at the National Post, Andrew Coyne gives his thoughts on the “logic of trade negotiations” in general:  “The whole situation is an absurdity.  It’s like a hostage negotiation in which both sides have guns to their own head.”

Moving Out:  Financial Post on the rough road ahead for Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney’s coming move to England; and the Globe and Mail on the importance of vetting cabinet officials and the resignation of Quebec’s environmental minister Daniel Breton. Added-Bonus:  Stephen Gordon at Macleans  on how much credit Carney should get from Canada’s robust post-financial crisis economic performance:

“What I take away from this is that we could have done much worse, but I don’t think we could have done much better. Stephen Harper and Mark Carney were dealt good hands and they played them well.”

Must-Read List.  The Globe and Mail picks the top 23 Canadian fiction books of the year.

Legal News

Going to (U.S.) Law School Worth It!  Lawrence E. Mitchell, Dean at the Case Western University School of Law, defends going to law school in the NYTimes:  

"We could do things better, and every law school with which I’m familiar is looking to address its problems. In the meantime, the one-sided analysis is inflicting significant damage, not only on law schools but also on a society that may well soon find itself bereft of its best and brightest lawyers."

Canada’s Lawyers in Crisis?  The Globe and Mail reports on the state of Ontario’s legal profession: “…it was clear that some of the country’s top legal minds believe their profession is, in effect broken.”

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.”