Talk of a US/Canada deal over a new bridge is greatly exaggerated and wishful thinking by some! One should probably be more concerned about a trade war starting between the two countries over the bridge!
I hope that you will excuse me. I know that I told you that I would let you know today whom I thought was responsible for the Radio-Canada news story. I'm afraid that this will have to wait for another time because something even more important has come up.
The reason why I changed what I was going to Blog about this morning is because of a tape that one of my readers sent to me. It was an interview on Detroit radio station WJR last week involving their morning host Frank Beckmann and Mickey Kantor. It would have been heard by many influential Americans across the State. You can hear it by doubleclicking on the image above. I apologize for the poor sound quality.
In case you do not know who he is, Mickey Kantor was United States Trade Representative, and the former United States Secretary of Commerce. In his role, he not only was involved in negotiating the NAFTA agreement between Canada and United States but he was also involved in its implementation.
There is no doubt in my mind that, given his understanding of the relationships between our countries, some of his comments have already been accepted as US government policy except that the US Government will express their feelings in much stronger terms at the appropriate time. Are our Governmental officials really this ridiculous that they have to rub not only the NAFTA issue in the face of the Americans (remember the brouhaha about renegotiation with Hillary and Obama) but now this.
This significance of the interview is important. You need to listen to it carefully so that you understand the ridiculous actions our Government is taking that may jeopardize our economic future, yours, dear reader, and mine! Read some of his remarks below and you will be shocked at the anti-Canadian tone!
It boggles my mind that our Government can be so stupid to jeopardize our future over one little bridge. Is the taking over of the Ambassador Bridge that important to the bureaucrats? It tells me that there is an awful lot more going on behind the scenes than we truly understand if such is the case.
I am extremely critical of the Harper Government and the way it is acting in trying to pressure the Bush Government into doing a deal with respect to the new DRIC bridge. I am concerned that those who are so interested in beating the Owner of the Ambassador Bridge do not understand the consequences of their actions with respect to Canada/United States relations. Unfortunately if I am right, it means that the relations between the two countries will sour.
I happened to be listening to an item on CBC news over the weekend in which former Canadian Ambassador to the US Allan Gotlieb also was talking about the thickening of the border. That's a new buzzword for Senator Kenny's "Dirty Little Secret."
- "But there is a dirty little secret behind some U.S. politicians’ lack of interest in rushing to make Canada-U.S. land border crossings more secure, and it is this:
Border uncertainty serves the interest of certain businesses and some local politicians in Michigan by making Canada a less attractive place to invest capital.
If industry perceives the border crossings at Windsor-Detroit to be unreliable, then in time Canada will see negative impacts such as less investment, and even disinvestment...
But to some American communities that would like to see investment in Canada move south of the border, this may amount to patriotic talk that disguises where they would actually like to walk."
My concern was heightened when the former Ambassador said that it was necessary for Canada to renegotiate the NAFTA treaty because of all the impediments being imposed by the Americans. In a sense, it is just like the Americans complaining about the Asian countries that make it difficult for them to trade.
Ambassador Gotlieb said that Canadians are complacent and believe that we have automatic access to the US market. He made it clear that we do not. Instead we need to negotiate not only to keep our access to that marketplace but also to find other outlets for our products in other countries around the world.
The problem that I see is that we are annoying our biggest customer right now and we are doing it over an insignificant matter in the scheme of things... the Ambassador Bridge. The issue for Canada ought to be the entry of our products into the US, not trying to make it easy for some P3 investor to take over the business of a private entrepreneur. It is a deliberate misstatement for the Government to talk about public ownership of the new bridge when they are immediately going to turn around and give it over to another private party.
There seems to be no gratitude to the Ambassador Bridge people for providing access to the United States market for Canadians for all of these years and by being the best border operator in North America at their own expense. Instead, Canada wishes to punish them. One needs to remember what was said in the Senate hearings with respect to this kind of action in relation to encouraging other investors to come to Canada:
- "Above and beyond the interests of the Ambassador Bridge, this government and governments will be going forward with PPPs in the future. We are hoping that more public-private partnerships will exist to share the responsibilities between the public and the private enterprise, whether it is Highway 50 or Highway 30 in Quebec or other bridges to be built. If we are not going to have respect for private projects that exist and that have been going well for 60 or 70 years, how can we expect private investors to risk, whether it is the "competing" project or the "existing" projects?"
If the Auditor General can do a review of the Blue Water Bridge concerning one contract for $7.5 million for consulting, then it is time that she took a look at this DRIC fiasco to find out what is really happening. It will knock her socks off when she uncovers the truth about the waste of money if she actually can do so.
I believe that it is important that you listen to what Kantor has to say either at work or at home. Here are some of the comments that Kantor made. Once you hear the whole interview, you will understand how this little bridge can blow up in Canada's face and create a huge controversy.
And for what:
- Canadian friends trying to shove and push a sovereign country, the US, into doing something that we are not even close to making a decision on
- Process has NOT been completed
- White House has made no such decision, no one has nor could they under the law
- Canada is trying to push the US and Michigan into spending a billion and a half dollars on building a bridge that is not necessary as traffic flows are going down every year since 1999
- Existing crossings are more than adequate to handle the volumes now and far into the future
- US has already invested money on the Ambassador Gateway project to link up to I-75
- Canada’s actions are "silly."
- Why do we have to spend all that US money to satisfy Canadians just because they want a different route to another bridge
- DRIC bridge was referred to as "Canadian sponsored" bridge
- Bureaucratic momentum gone wild especially on the Canadian side
- Under the law, no one in the US government as the process is going on can make any decision whether or not to support the Canadian sponsored bridge
- When we were in Government, private activities were sponsored and promoted as much as possible
- New bridge cannibalizes current traffic from other crossings and makes them less viable. It is nonsensical at this point
- Federal Government is spending $400M on the Blue Water Bridge and another bridge would make it less viable
- Money for the new bridge is NOT even close to being appropriated
- New bridge would take away from the money the US Government spent and make less viable the expenditures made already on the Ambassador Bridge and the Blue Water Bridge
- No, no, no…no announcement by mid-July. This is a long way away.
- Canadian Government will try and push and push this since they do not like a private bridge and would like a public bridge.
- Their bureaucrats are emotionally committed to this but we should not be pushed around by the Canadians.
- You have got to stand up once and awhile for our country and say no this is not in our interest.
No comments:
Post a Comment