This is part of a much longer article on plans to integrate US, Mexico, and Canada with sections on the SPP etc. The article is by Stephen Lendman at Countercurrents. Certainly Harper is spending more money on the military and is anxious for Canada to play a role as a junior partner to the US. However, he does stress sovereignty in the Arctic. Maybe the sovereignty is only an issue when non-US ships use the northwest passage. The US does not recognise the passage as Canadian waters but as international.
Militarizing A Continent As A First Step
No nation is more militarized today than America. It spends more on national defense and homeland security than all other nations combined. Add to those budgets all others related to defense, still others for intelligence and covert actions, plus the net interest cost attributable to past debt-financed defense outlays and it totals over $1 trillion for FY 2007 according to one analyst's estimate and heading way above that in FY 2008 if current budget proposals pass and become law which is almost certain.
Canada and Mexico are expected to share the load as part of Washington's "war on terrorism" and are doing it. Supporting Washington is central for Canada's Stephen Harper conservative administration. It includes adhering to the 2002 Binational Planning Agreement allowing US military forces to enter Canada on its own discretion, set up shop, and exercise authority over Canadians in their own country. Harper's more hard line than his predecessors. He believes Canadian political and business interests depend on it, and he's committed to serving them no matter how ordinary Canadians feel about it. He's submissive to Washington and has been massively ramping up military spending with plans to increase it over 50% above 2005 levels to $21.5 billion annually by 2010.
That's chump change by US standards but a major commitment for a nation traditionally spending at far lower levels. Canada faces no outside threat so spending hugely on its military, unlike in the past, defies tradition and public consensus favoring social spending that's being cut to pay for it. It's also contrary to Canada's traditionally eschewing militarism and foreign wars unlike its southern neighbor's thriving on them since the nation's founding.
Business interests, not national security or the public welfare, drive Harper's agenda. America accounts for 87% of Canada's exports, and Canadian businesses are closely allied with US ones. In many instances, it's as subsidiaries with US corporations owning 20% of Canada's non-financial sector, 33% of its oil and gas industry, and many Canadian defense companies linked to US ones as subsidiaries or in a sub-contracting capacity. Canada's influential Department of National Defense (DND), its new Chief of Defence Staff, General Rick Hillier and defence minister Gordon O'Connor are on board with Harper as well. They're committed to ramping up the nation's military spending and linking with America's "war on terrorism." It gives them more power to lock in even more as SPP advances and outlines a plan for it across the continent.
Showing posts with label Deep Integration of Canada US and Mexico. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Deep Integration of Canada US and Mexico. Show all posts
Saturday, July 21, 2007
Monday, June 11, 2007
The plan to disappear Canada
This is a good summary of some of the things that are happening to integrate Canada and the US )and Mexico. It is ironic that is often the right that is opposing the move in the US while it is the left here. Dobbin talks about deregulation but much of this is less deregulation than harmonisation of regulations to the detriment of national control and often resulting in weaker regulations as the pesiticide residues case shows. This is from Rabble.
The plan to disappear Canada
>by Murray Dobbin
June 11, 2007
If the machinations going on in this country regarding so-called “deep integration” were instead a communist conspiracy to take over the country (you will, of course, have to try hard to imagine this) the news media would be blaring the story.
Pundits would pontificate, editorialists would erupt, security forces would be unleashed.
Instead, a virtual conspiracy to make the country disappear through assimilation into the U.S. gets barely a mention.
But news of the scheme — formally called the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) — is finally breaking out of the secret chambers of the ruling elite and the federal government. This is both good news and bad. It's good that ordinary citizens are finally getting a glimpse of the betrayal of their country. The news is bad because it reflects just how much of this scheme is already being implemented.
Given the meetings of CEOs and politicians to advance the scheme politically, as well as all that must go into its actual implementation, there is simply too much activity to keep secret.
Ten dots to connect
Here are 10 developments in the plan to disappear Canada.
1) Pesticides 'harmonized.' The most thoroughly reported story (though even this did not go much beyond the CanWest chain) was the revelation that Canada was about to “harmonize” its regulations, setting limits for pesticide residue on fruits and vegetables. In 40 per cent of the cases, the U.S. allows for higher levels. Richard Aucoin, chief registrar of the Pest Management Regulatory Agency, which sets Canada's pesticide levels, said that Canada's higher levels were a “trade irritant.”
The downgrading of health protection had been a NAFTA initiative, but is being “fast-tracked” as part of the Security and Prosperity Partnership. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Some 300 regulatory regimes are currently going through the same process.
2) Tory tirade. The next story that broke through the wall of media silence reported on the paranoid reaction of the Harper Conservatives to any criticism of the SPP. The occasion was hearings of the Commons International Trade Committee into the SPP, forced by the NDP.
Gordon Laxer, head of Alberta's Parkland Institute, was testifying on the energy implications of the SPP, warning that eastern Canada could end up “freezing in the dark.” He had barely started when the chair of the committee, Conservative MP Leon Benoit, demanded that Laxer halt his “irrelevant” testimony. The Committee members overruled Benoit — who promptly (and illegally) adjourned the meeting and stomped out. The NDP and Liberal members nonetheless continued without him.
3) Council of corporate power. The SPP initiative began in earnest back in 2002 with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (formerly the BCNI), the most powerful corporate body in the country. It continues its leadership role, but does not promote the scheme just in its own name. It instead has helped create several supportive bodies that now help drive the agenda. Included in these are the North American Competitive Council (NACC), which includes CEOs of the largest North American corporations, and which institutionalizes the exclusively corporate nature of the agreement. The NACC is the only advisory group to the three NAFTA/SPP governments.
4) Secretive summit. The NACC at least is public. But much of what happens in building the elite consensus for deep integration is done in absolute secrecy or very privately, away from the prying eyes of the media. The most secretive of these was held last year from Sept. 12 to 14, in Banff Springs. As The Tyee reported, the gathering was sponsored by something called the North American Forum* and it was attended by some of the most powerful members of the North American ruling elite.
Attendees, according to a leaked list that could not be confirmed, included Donald Rumsfeld, George Schultz (former U.S. Secretary of State), General Rick Hillier, Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor and Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day. The media was not informed of the meeting and it was first revealed by the weekly Banff Crag & Canyon.
Stockwell Day refused to even confirm he was there, but said that even if he was, it was a “private” meeting that he would not comment on. There is no better indication that these meetings, and the SPP itself, constitute a parallel governing structure — unaccountable to any democratic institution or the public.
5) 'No fly' coordination. Canada will have its own “no-fly” list just like our U.S. “partner.”
As the Council of Canadians pointed out: “The no-fly list is very much a Security and Prosperity Partnership initiative. 'The SPP Report to Leaders, August 2006' outlines 105 SPP initiatives. Initiative #93 states, 'Develop, test, evaluate and implement a plan to establish comparable aviation passenger screening, and the screening of baggage and air cargo (for North America).'”
Canada's privacy commissioner Jennifer Stoddart has raised a number of concerns about the plan including the fact that the list will be shared with the U.S., that “false positives” are a virtual certainty, and that there is no evidence put forward by the government that the list will improve airline security.
6) Bye, bye Canadian dollar? David Dodge, the head of the Bank of Canada, told a Chicago audience that a single currency for North America “is possible.” That would see a big chunk of Canadian sovereignty and the ability to guide the economy through monetary policy go out the window. It's not the first time Dodge has mused about abandoning the Canadian dollar — or deep integration.
7) Water and oil giveaways. The deep integrationists clearly see Canadian water as a North American resource, not a Canadian resource. At yet another very private meeting, held in Calgary on April 27th under the auspices of yet another forum, it was made clear that water is on the table for negotiation.
Discussion of bulk “water transfers” and diversions took place at a Calgary meeting of the North American Future 2025 Project (partly funded by the U.S. government). The meeting based its deliberations on the false notion that Canada has 20 per cent of the world's fresh water. Actual available supply amounts to only around six per cent — about the same as has the U.S.
The water (and environment) meeting was preceded by another on April 26th talking about “North American” energy. The beneficiary of these discussions is pretty clear when you realize Canada has no national energy policy. We are the only energy exporting country in the world without a one.
Gordon Laxer told the Parliamentary committee: “The National Energy Board wrote me on April 12: 'Unfortunately, the NEB has not undertaken any studies on security of supply.'” He was also told by the NEB that Canada does not maintain a 90 day energy reserve as other developed nations do. As Laxer points out, “Canada may be a net exporter, but it still imports 40 per cent of its oil — 850,000 barrels per day — to meet 90 per cent of Atlantic Canada's and Quebec's needs, and 40 per cent of Ontario's.”
Canada exports 63 per cent of its oil production and 56 per cent of its natural gas, percentages that can never decrease under NAFTA.
8) NAFTA Superhighway. State governments in the U.S. are becoming increasingly alarmed at the prospects of deep integration. Earlier this year, Idaho became the first state to pass a legislative resolution directing the U.S. Congress to drop out of the SPP, which is referred to as the North American Union amongst U.S. opponents. Thirteen states in addition to Idaho are calling on Congress to abandon the SPP: Georgia, Arizona, Missouri, Illinois, Oregon, Montana, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington and Virginia.
Part of the opposition is focused on plans for a so-called NAFTA Superhighway: actually a corridor several hundred metres wide including rail lines, freeways and pipelines from Mexico to the Canadian border. There is a growing grassroots movement against the SPP in the U.S., but led by the right over the issue of compromising American sovereignty.
9) Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA). While U.S. states, concerned about state rights under an unaccountable “North American Union, ” are organizing against the scheme, Canadian provinces are either blithely unaware or knowingly complicit in the deal. More Canadians may be aware of TILMA — the investors' rights agreement between B.C. and Alberta — than they are about the SPP, but in reality they are one and the same.
TILMA is major piece of the deep integration, deregulation imperative and fits hand in glove with the SPP. There is a similar, though more informal, process evolving in the Atlantic provinces, called “Atlantica.” And B.C. is now pushing the so-called Gateway Initiative, a kind of regional superhighway project that will see huge and environmentally disastrous expansion of ports, highways and pipelines to further supply the U.S.'s insatiable demand for resources and cheap Asian goods.
10) The next SPP summit. The third leaders summit on the SPP will take place this August 21-22nd in Montebello, Quebec, not far from Ottawa. By the time it does many more Canadians will be aware of it.
Part of the reason that news of the SPP/deep integration issue is finally seeing the light of day is that opposition is growing and groups fighting the SPP are having an impact. The Council of Canadians, the CLC and the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives held an SPP teach-in in Ottawa last month and many civil society groups are now taking deep integration to their members. Demonstrations are planned for the summit. The NDP continues to press the government on SPP secrecy and the Green Party's Elizabeth May has said deep integration will be a focus of the party's election platform.
It is hard to think of any other issue in modern Canadian history, especially one that will literally determine whether the country survives or not, that has taken so long to get public attention. I first wrote about it September, 2002.
By the time the SPP summit has come and gone and the fall political season begins, deep integration, the most treacherous plan for the country yet devised by Bay Street, will be increasingly exposed.
And by the next election, we could see a repeat of the great “free trade” election of 1988. This time we have to win.
Murray Dobbin writes from Vancouver. This column has appeared in The Tyee.
The plan to disappear Canada
>by Murray Dobbin
June 11, 2007
If the machinations going on in this country regarding so-called “deep integration” were instead a communist conspiracy to take over the country (you will, of course, have to try hard to imagine this) the news media would be blaring the story.
Pundits would pontificate, editorialists would erupt, security forces would be unleashed.
Instead, a virtual conspiracy to make the country disappear through assimilation into the U.S. gets barely a mention.
But news of the scheme — formally called the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) — is finally breaking out of the secret chambers of the ruling elite and the federal government. This is both good news and bad. It's good that ordinary citizens are finally getting a glimpse of the betrayal of their country. The news is bad because it reflects just how much of this scheme is already being implemented.
Given the meetings of CEOs and politicians to advance the scheme politically, as well as all that must go into its actual implementation, there is simply too much activity to keep secret.
Ten dots to connect
Here are 10 developments in the plan to disappear Canada.
1) Pesticides 'harmonized.' The most thoroughly reported story (though even this did not go much beyond the CanWest chain) was the revelation that Canada was about to “harmonize” its regulations, setting limits for pesticide residue on fruits and vegetables. In 40 per cent of the cases, the U.S. allows for higher levels. Richard Aucoin, chief registrar of the Pest Management Regulatory Agency, which sets Canada's pesticide levels, said that Canada's higher levels were a “trade irritant.”
The downgrading of health protection had been a NAFTA initiative, but is being “fast-tracked” as part of the Security and Prosperity Partnership. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Some 300 regulatory regimes are currently going through the same process.
2) Tory tirade. The next story that broke through the wall of media silence reported on the paranoid reaction of the Harper Conservatives to any criticism of the SPP. The occasion was hearings of the Commons International Trade Committee into the SPP, forced by the NDP.
Gordon Laxer, head of Alberta's Parkland Institute, was testifying on the energy implications of the SPP, warning that eastern Canada could end up “freezing in the dark.” He had barely started when the chair of the committee, Conservative MP Leon Benoit, demanded that Laxer halt his “irrelevant” testimony. The Committee members overruled Benoit — who promptly (and illegally) adjourned the meeting and stomped out. The NDP and Liberal members nonetheless continued without him.
3) Council of corporate power. The SPP initiative began in earnest back in 2002 with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (formerly the BCNI), the most powerful corporate body in the country. It continues its leadership role, but does not promote the scheme just in its own name. It instead has helped create several supportive bodies that now help drive the agenda. Included in these are the North American Competitive Council (NACC), which includes CEOs of the largest North American corporations, and which institutionalizes the exclusively corporate nature of the agreement. The NACC is the only advisory group to the three NAFTA/SPP governments.
4) Secretive summit. The NACC at least is public. But much of what happens in building the elite consensus for deep integration is done in absolute secrecy or very privately, away from the prying eyes of the media. The most secretive of these was held last year from Sept. 12 to 14, in Banff Springs. As The Tyee reported, the gathering was sponsored by something called the North American Forum* and it was attended by some of the most powerful members of the North American ruling elite.
Attendees, according to a leaked list that could not be confirmed, included Donald Rumsfeld, George Schultz (former U.S. Secretary of State), General Rick Hillier, Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor and Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day. The media was not informed of the meeting and it was first revealed by the weekly Banff Crag & Canyon.
Stockwell Day refused to even confirm he was there, but said that even if he was, it was a “private” meeting that he would not comment on. There is no better indication that these meetings, and the SPP itself, constitute a parallel governing structure — unaccountable to any democratic institution or the public.
5) 'No fly' coordination. Canada will have its own “no-fly” list just like our U.S. “partner.”
As the Council of Canadians pointed out: “The no-fly list is very much a Security and Prosperity Partnership initiative. 'The SPP Report to Leaders, August 2006' outlines 105 SPP initiatives. Initiative #93 states, 'Develop, test, evaluate and implement a plan to establish comparable aviation passenger screening, and the screening of baggage and air cargo (for North America).'”
Canada's privacy commissioner Jennifer Stoddart has raised a number of concerns about the plan including the fact that the list will be shared with the U.S., that “false positives” are a virtual certainty, and that there is no evidence put forward by the government that the list will improve airline security.
6) Bye, bye Canadian dollar? David Dodge, the head of the Bank of Canada, told a Chicago audience that a single currency for North America “is possible.” That would see a big chunk of Canadian sovereignty and the ability to guide the economy through monetary policy go out the window. It's not the first time Dodge has mused about abandoning the Canadian dollar — or deep integration.
7) Water and oil giveaways. The deep integrationists clearly see Canadian water as a North American resource, not a Canadian resource. At yet another very private meeting, held in Calgary on April 27th under the auspices of yet another forum, it was made clear that water is on the table for negotiation.
Discussion of bulk “water transfers” and diversions took place at a Calgary meeting of the North American Future 2025 Project (partly funded by the U.S. government). The meeting based its deliberations on the false notion that Canada has 20 per cent of the world's fresh water. Actual available supply amounts to only around six per cent — about the same as has the U.S.
The water (and environment) meeting was preceded by another on April 26th talking about “North American” energy. The beneficiary of these discussions is pretty clear when you realize Canada has no national energy policy. We are the only energy exporting country in the world without a one.
Gordon Laxer told the Parliamentary committee: “The National Energy Board wrote me on April 12: 'Unfortunately, the NEB has not undertaken any studies on security of supply.'” He was also told by the NEB that Canada does not maintain a 90 day energy reserve as other developed nations do. As Laxer points out, “Canada may be a net exporter, but it still imports 40 per cent of its oil — 850,000 barrels per day — to meet 90 per cent of Atlantic Canada's and Quebec's needs, and 40 per cent of Ontario's.”
Canada exports 63 per cent of its oil production and 56 per cent of its natural gas, percentages that can never decrease under NAFTA.
8) NAFTA Superhighway. State governments in the U.S. are becoming increasingly alarmed at the prospects of deep integration. Earlier this year, Idaho became the first state to pass a legislative resolution directing the U.S. Congress to drop out of the SPP, which is referred to as the North American Union amongst U.S. opponents. Thirteen states in addition to Idaho are calling on Congress to abandon the SPP: Georgia, Arizona, Missouri, Illinois, Oregon, Montana, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington and Virginia.
Part of the opposition is focused on plans for a so-called NAFTA Superhighway: actually a corridor several hundred metres wide including rail lines, freeways and pipelines from Mexico to the Canadian border. There is a growing grassroots movement against the SPP in the U.S., but led by the right over the issue of compromising American sovereignty.
9) Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA). While U.S. states, concerned about state rights under an unaccountable “North American Union, ” are organizing against the scheme, Canadian provinces are either blithely unaware or knowingly complicit in the deal. More Canadians may be aware of TILMA — the investors' rights agreement between B.C. and Alberta — than they are about the SPP, but in reality they are one and the same.
TILMA is major piece of the deep integration, deregulation imperative and fits hand in glove with the SPP. There is a similar, though more informal, process evolving in the Atlantic provinces, called “Atlantica.” And B.C. is now pushing the so-called Gateway Initiative, a kind of regional superhighway project that will see huge and environmentally disastrous expansion of ports, highways and pipelines to further supply the U.S.'s insatiable demand for resources and cheap Asian goods.
10) The next SPP summit. The third leaders summit on the SPP will take place this August 21-22nd in Montebello, Quebec, not far from Ottawa. By the time it does many more Canadians will be aware of it.
Part of the reason that news of the SPP/deep integration issue is finally seeing the light of day is that opposition is growing and groups fighting the SPP are having an impact. The Council of Canadians, the CLC and the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives held an SPP teach-in in Ottawa last month and many civil society groups are now taking deep integration to their members. Demonstrations are planned for the summit. The NDP continues to press the government on SPP secrecy and the Green Party's Elizabeth May has said deep integration will be a focus of the party's election platform.
It is hard to think of any other issue in modern Canadian history, especially one that will literally determine whether the country survives or not, that has taken so long to get public attention. I first wrote about it September, 2002.
By the time the SPP summit has come and gone and the fall political season begins, deep integration, the most treacherous plan for the country yet devised by Bay Street, will be increasingly exposed.
And by the next election, we could see a repeat of the great “free trade” election of 1988. This time we have to win.
Murray Dobbin writes from Vancouver. This column has appeared in The Tyee.
Monday, April 9, 2007
TILMA: Trade Investment and Labor Mobility Agreement
The mainstream press has had little or nothing to say about this agreement. THe Council of Canadians has tried to alert the public about it. This is taken from a Canadian Progressive Economists blog.
TILMA and the environment
Posted by Marc Lee under TILMA , environment
1 Comment
Last week, the Sierra Legal Defence Fund published a legal analysis on the environment and TILMA. Below is an excerpt from the press release, and the full document is here. This is an important analysis as BC’s point man on the file, Colin Hansen, has been claiming that the environment has been set aside as a “legitimate objective”.
April Fools’ Day trade pact undermines measures to fight climate change
BC–Alberta agreement also creates hurdles for endangered species and curbing pollution
VANCOUVER, BC – Key aspects of environmental regulation from municipal to provincial lawmaking will be turned upside down this Sunday April 1st when the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA) comes into force. Although the aim of the agreement is to turn Alberta and BC into an economic powerhouse, a legal analysis of TILMA by Sierra Legal reveals it could seriously threaten the provinces’ endangered species and jeopardize potential initiatives to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
TILMA sets rules for all governments within the trade zone (including, in 2009, municipalities) and allows individuals and corporations to sue BC or Alberta for up to $5 million if its rules are broken, even if a government, including local governments, is acting to help the environment. The agreement does include some environmental exemptions regarding water and the promotion of renewable and alternative energy, but other government measures (laws, programs, policies) aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants, or protecting endangered species cannot overly restrict trade or investment. No input from environmental groups or the public is required in coming to such a decision.
“It’s scary to think that a dispute panel created under an agreement aimed exclusively at boosting trade and investment can make such profound decisions on our environment,” said Keith Ferguson, Staff Lawyer with Sierra Legal. “In this time of increased awareness for the need to protect our environment, I find it unbelievable that the governments of BC and Alberta are pushing this.”
TILMA and the environment
Posted by Marc Lee under TILMA , environment
1 Comment
Last week, the Sierra Legal Defence Fund published a legal analysis on the environment and TILMA. Below is an excerpt from the press release, and the full document is here. This is an important analysis as BC’s point man on the file, Colin Hansen, has been claiming that the environment has been set aside as a “legitimate objective”.
April Fools’ Day trade pact undermines measures to fight climate change
BC–Alberta agreement also creates hurdles for endangered species and curbing pollution
VANCOUVER, BC – Key aspects of environmental regulation from municipal to provincial lawmaking will be turned upside down this Sunday April 1st when the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA) comes into force. Although the aim of the agreement is to turn Alberta and BC into an economic powerhouse, a legal analysis of TILMA by Sierra Legal reveals it could seriously threaten the provinces’ endangered species and jeopardize potential initiatives to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
TILMA sets rules for all governments within the trade zone (including, in 2009, municipalities) and allows individuals and corporations to sue BC or Alberta for up to $5 million if its rules are broken, even if a government, including local governments, is acting to help the environment. The agreement does include some environmental exemptions regarding water and the promotion of renewable and alternative energy, but other government measures (laws, programs, policies) aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants, or protecting endangered species cannot overly restrict trade or investment. No input from environmental groups or the public is required in coming to such a decision.
“It’s scary to think that a dispute panel created under an agreement aimed exclusively at boosting trade and investment can make such profound decisions on our environment,” said Keith Ferguson, Staff Lawyer with Sierra Legal. “In this time of increased awareness for the need to protect our environment, I find it unbelievable that the governments of BC and Alberta are pushing this.”
Sunday, March 11, 2007
Canada follolws US lead in Daylight Saving Time
Interesting that we seem to have simply followed the US lead. I wonder if Mexico did too. However that far south perhaps daylight saving is not used at all. Maybe this is another sign of "deep integration". I imagine those opposed to a North American Union will get even less sleep! Well at least Saskatchewan is declaring its independence and keeping to standard time. Many farmers have always opposed daylight saving. Its seems farm animals refuse to adjust their clocks as well!
Early daylight time means less shuteye
Clocks spring ahead 1 hour Sunday in most parts of Canada
Last Updated: Saturday, March 10, 2007 | 10:37 PM ET
CBC News
Many Canadians will no doubt be feeling the sleepy eyes of March on Sunday morning, as daylight time at 2 a.m. in each time zone traditionally means the springing ahead of clocks by one hour before bedtime.
This year, daylight time, established in most parts of the country, comes three weeks earlier than usual, starting the second Sunday in March instead of the first Sunday in April — after the ushering in of spring — and ending late as well, the first Sunday in November.
Dr. Brian Murray, Toronto neurologist and sleep specialist, says he would do away with daylight time altogether.
(CBC) The three-weeks-early start is the result of Canada following the lead of the U.S., a move designed to save energy.
Sleep experts, however, say many Canadians don't get enough shuteye already, and studies have shown the time change can affect how the brain functions the Monday after the clocks have changed.
"There's a small increase in traffic accidents that occurs in the period of time where an hour of sleep is lost, which is interesting," says Dr. Brian Murray, a neurologist and sleep specialist at the Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto.
"I would be happy if we did away with it just for the nuisance of having to reset clocks and computers and all."
Continue Article
Time for time concerns
The earlier time change is presenting some challenges this year.
Software companies, including Apple and Microsoft, have issued patches for users to update their systems, while Health Canada has warned people to check medical devices that may not register the time change.
The new North American standard for daylight time has caused concern that computers and electronic devices will be confused and that it will cost the economy millions of dollars.
But David Probst, a computer science professor at Concordia University in Montreal, says the confusion is not likely to happen.
"You will find people who record the wrong television show on their VCR, and you might even have some gadgets that stop working, but the seriousness will be so insignificant that there will be no headlines whatsoever on Sunday morning," he predicts.
But he says he thinks there could be some loss of productivity if people who forget about the time change show up late for meetings or work on Monday.
Elliot Katz, a senior product manager at Microsoft, says he thinks the time change will not cause massive problems.
"We really don't expect to see anything significant happen. The most we envision is people double check that their systems have been updated properly so they're not late for meetings and things of that kind."
U.S. President George W. Bush signed legislation in August 2005 calling for the earlier daylight time.
The new schedule was introduced to try to help save energy, with the expectation that people would not need their lights on as early in the evening.
But debate continues about how effective the change will be at reducing energy consumption.
More daylight means less ZZZs
Daylight time in Canada is usually regulated by provincial and territorial governments. From 1987 to 2006, it was from the first Sunday of April to the last Sunday in October.
Most of Saskatchewan uses Central Standard Time year round. There are also small pockets in B.C., northern Ontario, Quebec and Nunavut where daylight time is not observed.
According to the Better Sleep Council Canada, the time change will simply add to the sleep deficit that many Canadians carry.
It recommends:
Encouraging sleep by easing into bed.
Turning off the television.
Not exercising before bedtime.
Not consuming alcohol or coffee before going to bed.
Early daylight time means less shuteye
Clocks spring ahead 1 hour Sunday in most parts of Canada
Last Updated: Saturday, March 10, 2007 | 10:37 PM ET
CBC News
Many Canadians will no doubt be feeling the sleepy eyes of March on Sunday morning, as daylight time at 2 a.m. in each time zone traditionally means the springing ahead of clocks by one hour before bedtime.
This year, daylight time, established in most parts of the country, comes three weeks earlier than usual, starting the second Sunday in March instead of the first Sunday in April — after the ushering in of spring — and ending late as well, the first Sunday in November.
Dr. Brian Murray, Toronto neurologist and sleep specialist, says he would do away with daylight time altogether.
(CBC) The three-weeks-early start is the result of Canada following the lead of the U.S., a move designed to save energy.
Sleep experts, however, say many Canadians don't get enough shuteye already, and studies have shown the time change can affect how the brain functions the Monday after the clocks have changed.
"There's a small increase in traffic accidents that occurs in the period of time where an hour of sleep is lost, which is interesting," says Dr. Brian Murray, a neurologist and sleep specialist at the Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto.
"I would be happy if we did away with it just for the nuisance of having to reset clocks and computers and all."
Continue Article
Time for time concerns
The earlier time change is presenting some challenges this year.
Software companies, including Apple and Microsoft, have issued patches for users to update their systems, while Health Canada has warned people to check medical devices that may not register the time change.
The new North American standard for daylight time has caused concern that computers and electronic devices will be confused and that it will cost the economy millions of dollars.
But David Probst, a computer science professor at Concordia University in Montreal, says the confusion is not likely to happen.
"You will find people who record the wrong television show on their VCR, and you might even have some gadgets that stop working, but the seriousness will be so insignificant that there will be no headlines whatsoever on Sunday morning," he predicts.
But he says he thinks there could be some loss of productivity if people who forget about the time change show up late for meetings or work on Monday.
Elliot Katz, a senior product manager at Microsoft, says he thinks the time change will not cause massive problems.
"We really don't expect to see anything significant happen. The most we envision is people double check that their systems have been updated properly so they're not late for meetings and things of that kind."
U.S. President George W. Bush signed legislation in August 2005 calling for the earlier daylight time.
The new schedule was introduced to try to help save energy, with the expectation that people would not need their lights on as early in the evening.
But debate continues about how effective the change will be at reducing energy consumption.
More daylight means less ZZZs
Daylight time in Canada is usually regulated by provincial and territorial governments. From 1987 to 2006, it was from the first Sunday of April to the last Sunday in October.
Most of Saskatchewan uses Central Standard Time year round. There are also small pockets in B.C., northern Ontario, Quebec and Nunavut where daylight time is not observed.
According to the Better Sleep Council Canada, the time change will simply add to the sleep deficit that many Canadians carry.
It recommends:
Encouraging sleep by easing into bed.
Turning off the television.
Not exercising before bedtime.
Not consuming alcohol or coffee before going to bed.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
North American Security and Prosperity Initiative
This is an interesting account of plans for deep integration of Canada US and Mexico. It is virtually undiscussed by the mainstream media. I am finally realizing that many important issues are virtually ignored by mainstream media while the public are fed sensational stories such as the trials of serial killers. The eventual outcome of this process would be a North American Union dominated by the US.As with NAFTA the US would be assured of preferred access to the natural resources particularly oil of Canada and Mexico.
Timeline of the Progress Toward a North American Union
Canadian, U.S., and Mexican elites, including CEOS and politicians, have a plan to create common North American policies and further integrate our economies. This plan goes by various names and euphemisms, such as "deep integration", "NAFTA-plus", "harmonization", the "Big Idea", the "Grand Bargain", and the "North American Security and Prosperity Initiative". Regardless of which name your prefer, the end goal of all of these plans is to create a new political and economic entity that would supercede the existing countries. Advocates refer to it as a "North American Community", but it is also known as the North American Union (NAU). Theoretically, it would be similar to and competetive with the European Union (EU). The individual currencies of each country would be replaced by a common currency called the "Amero" and everything from environmental regulations to security would be brought in line with a common standard.
Vive le Canada.ca offers the following timeline as a resource to educate the general public about the progress of the three countries toward a new North American Union (NAU).
Vive le Canada.ca opposes the creation of the North American Union (NAU) because we believe it will mean the loss of Canadian sovereignty and democracy and hand over more power to giant, unelected corporations. We also believe that unlike the EU, the countries joining the NAU are not roughly equal in size and power and that this means the U.S. will most certainly be setting policy for all three countries. Considering the unpopularity of the Bush administration and its policies in the U.S., Canada, and around the world we believe that erasing the borders between our countries and adopting U.S. policies at this time is a bad idea and will create economic, political and military insecurity in this country. We hope that raising awareness about the plan to create a North American Union (NAU) will create opposition and encourage debate in all three countries, but especially in Canada.
Note: This timeline is a work in progress and will be updated as events progress. If you notice a correction that needs to be made or an event that should be included, please email susan.thompson@vivelecanada.ca
Timeline
1921: The Council on Foreign Relations is founded by Edward Mandell House, who had been the chief advisor of President Woodrow Wilson.
1973: David Rockefeller asks Zbigniew Brzezinski and a few others, including from the Brookings Institution, Council on Foreign Relations and the Ford Foundation, to put together an organization of the top political, and business leaders from around the world. He calls this group the Trilateral Commission (TC). The first meeting of the group is held in Tokyo in October. See: Trilateral Commission FAQ
1974: Richard Gardner, one of the members of the Trilateral Commission, publishes an article titled "The Hard Road to World Order" which appeared in Foreign Affairs magazine, published by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). In the article he wrote: "In short, the 'house of world order' would have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing confusion,' to use William James' famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault." Gardner advocated treaties and trade agreements as a means of creating a new economic world order. See: The Hard Road to World Order
November 13, 1979: While officially declaring his candidacy for U.S. President, Ronald Reagan proposes a “North American Agreement” which will produce “a North American continent in which the goods and people of the three countries will cross boundaries more freely.”
January 1981: U.S. President Ronald Reagan proposes a North American common market.
September 4, 1984: Conservative Brian Mulroney is elected Prime Minister of Canada after opposing free trade during the campaign.
September 25, 1984: Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney meets President Reagan in Washington and promises closer relations with the US.
October 9, 1984: The US Congress adopts the Trade and Tariff Act, an omnibus trade act that notably extends the powers of the president to concede trade benefits and enter into bilateral free trade agreements. The Act would be passed on October 30, 1984.
1985: A Canadian Royal Commission on the economy chaired by former Liberal Minister of Finance Donald S. Macdonald issues a report to the Government of Canada recommending free trade with the United States.
St. Patrick's Day, 1985: Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and President Ronald Reagan sing "When Irish Eyes Are Smiling" together to cap off the "Shamrock Summit", a 24-hour meeting in Quebec City that opened the door to future free trade talks between the countries. Commentator Eric Kierans observed that "The general impression you get, is that our prime minister invited his boss home for dinner." Canadian historian Jack Granatstein said that this "public display of sucking up to Reagan may have been the single most demeaning moment in the entire political history of Canada's relations with the United States."
September 26, 1985: Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney announces that Canada will try to reach a free trade agreement with the US.
December 10, 1985: U.S. President Reagan officially informs Congress about his intention to negotiate a free trade agreement with Canada under the authority of trade promotion. Referred to as fast track, trade promotion authority is an accelerated legislative procedure which obliges the House of Representatives and the Senate to decide within 90 days whether or not to establish a trade trade unit. No amendments are permitted.
May 1986: Canadian and American negotiators begin to work out a free trade deal. The Canadian team is led by former deputy Minister of Finance Simon Reisman and the American side by Peter O. Murphy, the former deputy United States trade representative in Geneva.
October 3, 1987: The 20-chapter Canada–United States Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA or FTA) is finalized. U.S. trade representative Clayton Yeutter offers this observation: "We've signed a stunning new trade pact with Canada. The Canadians don't understand what they've signed. In twenty years, they will be sucked into the U.S. economy."
November 6, 1987: Signing of a framework agreement between the US and Mexico.
January 2, 1988: Prime Minister Mulroney and President Reagan officially sign the FTA.
January 1, 1989: The Canada US Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA or FTA) goes into effect.
June 10, 1990: Presidents Bush (U.S.) and Salinas (Mexico) announce that they will begin discussions aimed at liberalizing trade between their countries.
August 21, 1990: Mexican President Salinas officially proposes to the US president the negotiation of a free trade agreement between Mexico and the US.
February 5, 1991: Negotiations between the US and Mexico aimed at liberalizing trade between the two countries officially become trilateral at the request of the Canadian government under Brian Mulroney.
April 7 to 10, 1991: Cooperation agreements are signed between Mexico and Canada covering taxation, cultural production and exports.
May 24, 1991: The American Senate endorses the extension of fast track authority in order to facilitate the negotiation of free trade with Mexico.
June 12, 1991: Start of trade negotiations between Canada, the US and Mexico.
April 4, 1992 Signing in Mexico by Canada and Mexico of a protocol agreement on cooperation projects regarding labour.
August 12, 1992: Signing of an agreement in principle on NAFTA.
September 17, 1992: Creation of a trilateral commission responsible for examining cooperation in the area of the environment.
October 7, 1992: Official signing of NAFTA by Michael Wilson of Canada (minister), American ambassador Carla Hills and Mexican secretary Jaime Serra Puche, in San Antonio (Texas).
December 17, 1992: Official signing of NAFTA by Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, US president George Bush, and Mexican president Carlos Salinas de Gortari, subject to its final approval by the federal Parliaments of the three countries.
March 17 and 18, 1993: Start of tripartite discussions in Washington aimed at reaching subsidiary agreements covering labor and the environment.
September 14, 1993: Official signing of parallel agreements covering labor and the environment in the capitals of the three countries.
1993: The Liberal Party under Jean Chretien promises to renegotiate NAFTA in its campaign platform, titled "Creating Opportunity: the Liberal Plan for Canada" and also known as The Red Book.
December 1993: Newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien signs NAFTA without changes, breaking his promise to renegotiate NAFTA. U.S. President Bill Clinton signs NAFTA for the U.S.
November 1993: The North American Development Bank (NADB) and its sister institution, the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC), are created under the auspices of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to address environmental issues in the U.S.-Mexico border region. The two institutions initiate operations under the November 1993 Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the United Mexican States Concerning the Establishment of a Border Environment Cooperation Commission and a North American Development Bank (the “Charter”). See: About Us (The North American Development Bank)
January 1, 1994: NAFTA and the two agreements on labour and the environment go into effect, replacing CUSFTA.
November 16, 1994: Canada and Mexico sign a cooperation agreement regarding the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
December 1994: The Summit of the Americas is held in Miami. The three signatories of NAFTA officially invite Chile to become a contractual party of the agreement. The Free Trade Area of the Americas or FTAA is initiated. According to the offical FTAA website, "the Heads of State and Government of the 34 democracies in the region agreed to construct a Free Trade Area of the Americas, or FTAA, in which barriers to trade and investment will be progressively eliminated. They agreed to complete negotiations towards this agreement by the year 2005 and to achieve substantial progress toward building the FTAA by 2000." See: FTAA
December 22, 1994: Mexican monetary authorities decide to let the Peso float. The US and Canada open a US$6 billion line of credit for Mexico.
January 3, 1995: Mexican president Ernesto Zedillo presents an emergency plan.
January 1995: President Clinton announces an aid plan for Mexico.
February 9, 1995: Mickey Kantor, the US Foreign Trade representative, announces Washington’s intention to include the provisions of NAFTA regarding labor and the environment in negotiations with Chile.
February 21, 1995: Signing in Washington of an agreement regarding the financial assistance given to Mexico. Mexico in turn promises to pay Mexican oil export revenue as a guarantee into an account at the Federal Reserve in New York.
February 28, 1995: Mexico announces the increase of its customs duties on a number of imports from countries with which it does not have a free trade agreement.
March 9, 1995: President Zedillo presents austerity measures. The plan envisages a 50% increase in value added taxes, a 10% reduction of government expenditure, a 35% increase in gas prices, a 20% increase in electricity prices and a 100% increase in transportation prices. The minimum wage is increased by 10%. The private sector can benefit from government assistance. The inter-bank rate that is reduced to 74% will be increased to 109% on March 15.
March 29, 1995: Statistical data on US foreign trade confirms the sharp increase in Mexican exports to the US.
April 10, 1995: The US dollar reaches its lowest level in history on the international market. It depreciated by 50% relative to the Japanese yen in only four years.
June 7, 1995: First meeting of the ministers of Foreign Trade of Canada (Roy MacLaren), the US (Mickey Kantor), Mexico (Herminio Blanco) and Chile (Eduardo Aninat) to start negotiations.
December 29, 1995: Chile and Canada commit to negotiate a bilateral free trade agreement.
June 3, 1996: Chile and Canada start negotiating the reciprocal opening of markets in Santiago.
November 18, 1996: Signing in Ottawa of the Canada-Chile free trade agreement by Jean Chrétien, Prime Minister of Canada and Eduardo Frei, President of Chile. The agreement frees 80% of trade between the two countries. It is the first free trade agreement signed between Chile and a member of the G 7.
July 4, 1997: The Canada-Chile free trade agreement comes into effect.
1997: The US presidency proposes applying NAFTA parity to Caribbean countries.
April 17, 1998: Signing in Santiago, Chile of the free trade agreement between Chile and Mexico by President Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de León of Mexico, and President Eduardo Frei of Chile.
August 1, 1999: The Chile-Mexico free trade agreement comes into effect.
September, 1999: The Canadian right-wing think tank the Fraser Institute publishes a paper by Herbert G. Grubel titled "The Case for the Amero: The Economics and Politics of a North American Monetary Union." In the paper Grubel argues that a common currency is not inevitable but it is desirable. See: The Case for the Amero
July 2, 2000: Vicente Fox Quesada of the National Action Party (PAN), is elected president of Mexico, thus ending the reign of the Revolutionary Institutional Party (RIP) that had held power for 71 years. Mr. Fox is sworn in on 1 December 2000.
July 4, 2000: Mexican president Vicente Fox proposes a 20 to 30 year timeline for the creation of a common North American market. President Fox’s “20/20 vision” as it is commonly called, includes the following: a customs union, a common external tariff, greater coordination of policies, common monetary policies, free flow of labor, and fiscal transfers for the development of poor Mexican regions. With the model of the European Fund in mind, President Fox suggests that US$10 to 30 billion be invested in NAFTA to support underdeveloped regions. The fund could be administered by an international financial institution such as the Inter-American Development Bank.
November 27, 2000: Trade negotiations resume between the US and Chile for Chile’s possible entry into NAFTA.
2001: Robert Pastor's 2001 book "Toward a North American Community" is published. The book calls for the creation of a North American Union (NAU).
April 2001: Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien and US President George W. Bush sign the Declaration of Quebec City at the third Summit of the Americas: “This is a ‘commitment to hemispheric integration." See: Declaration of Quebec City
August 30, 2001: The Institute for International Economics issues a press release advocating that the United States and Mexico should use the occasion of the visit of President Vicente Fox of Mexico on September 4-7 to develop a North American Community as advocated by Robert Pastor in his book "Toward a North American Community." See: A Blueprint for a North American Community
September 11, 2001: A series of coordinated suicide terrorist attacks upon the United States, predominantly targeting civilians, are carried out on Tuesday, September 11, 2001. Two planes (United Airlines Flight 175 and American Airlines Flight 11) crashed into the World Trade Center in New York City, one plane into each tower (One and Two). Both towers collapsed within two hours. The pilot of the third team crashed a plane into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia. Passengers and members of the flight crew on the fourth aircraft attempted to retake control of their plane from the hijackers; that plane crashed into a field near the town of Shanksville in rural Somerset County, Pennsylvania. Excluding the 19 hijackers, a confirmed 2,973 people died and another 24 remain listed as missing as a result of these attacks. In response, the Bush administration launches the "war on terror" and becomes very concerned with security.
December 2001: New U.S. Ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci publicly advocates "NAFTA-plus". See: The Emergence of a North American Community?
December 2001: U.S. Governor Tom Ridge and Canadian Deputy Prime Minister John Manley sign the Smart Border Declaration and Associated 30-Point Action Plan to Enhance the Security of Our Shared Border While Facilitating the Legitimate Flow of People and Goods. The Action Plan has four pillars: the secure flow of people, the secure flow of goods, secure infrastructure, and information. It includes shared customs data, a safe third-country agreement, harmonized commercial processing, etc.
February 7, 2002: Robert Pastor gives invited testimony before the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade, House of Commons, Government of Canada, Ottawa. See: INVITED TESTIMONY OF DR. ROBERT A. PASTOR
April 2002: The Canadian right-wing think tank the C.D. Howe Institute publishes the first paper in the "Border Papers" series, which they have described as "a project on Canada's choices regarding North American integration." The Border Papers were published with the financial backing of the Donner Canadian Foundation. Generally the border papers advocate deep integration between Canada and the U.S., and the first border paper "Shaping the Future of the North American Economic Space: A Framework for Action" by Wendy Dobson popularized the term "the Big Idea" as one euphemism for deep integration. To read the border papers, you can visit the C.D. Howe Institute website at www.cdhowe.org. Use the publication search form (1996 to current, PDF) and choose "border papers" from the "Serie contains" drop down menu.
September 9, 2002: President Bush and Prime Minister Chrétien meet to discuss progress on the Smart Border Action Plan and ask that they be updated regularly on the work being done to harmonize our common border.
December 5, 2002: The text of the Safe Third Country Agreement is signed by officials of Canada and the United States as part of the Smart Border Action Plan. See the final text here: Final Text of the Safe Third Country Agreement Refugee support groups on both sides of the Canadian-U.S. border criticize the new agreement dealing with refugees for stipulating that refugees must seek asylum in whichever of the two countries they reach first. Critics say that preventing individuals who first set foot in the U.S. from making a claim in Canada will increase cases of human smuggling, and that other refugees will be forced to live without any kind of legal status in the U.S. See for example: 10 Reasons Why Safe Third Country is a Bad Deal
September 11, 2002: The National Post publishes an article by Alan Gotlieb, the chairman of the Donner Canadian Foundation and Canada's ambassador to the United States from 1981 to 1989, titled "Why not a grand bargain with the U.S.?" In the article, Gotlieb asks "Rather than eschewing further integration with the United States, shouldn't we be building on NAFTA to create new rules, new tribunals, new institutions to secure our trade? Wouldn't this 'legal integration' be superior to ad hoc responses and largely ineffective lobbying to prevent harm from Congressional protectionist sorties? Wouldn't our economic security be enhanced by establishing a single North American competitive market without anti-dumping and countervail rules? Are there not elements of a grand bargain to be struck, combining North American economic, defence and security arrangements within a common perimeter?" See: Why not a grand bargain with the U.S.?
November 1-2, 2002: Robert Pastor presents "A North American Community. A Modest Proposal To the Trilateral Commission," to the North American Regional Meeting, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Pastor called for implementation of "a series of political proposals which would have authority over the sovereignty of the United States, Canada and Mexico. ... the creation of North American passports and a North American Customs and Immigrations, which would have authority over U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) within the Department of Homeland Security. A North American Parliamentary Group would oversee the U.S. Congress. A Permanent Court on Trade and Investment would resolve disputes within NAFTA, exerting final authority over the judgments of the U.S. Supreme Court. A North American Commission would 'develop an integrated continental plan for transportation and infrastructure.'" See: A North American Community. A Modest Proposal To the Trilateral Commission
December 6, 2002: The White House issues an update on the progress of the Smart Border Action Plan. See: U.S. Canada Smart Border 30 Point Action Plan Update
December, 2002: US Secretary Colin Powell signs an agreement between the United States and Canada to establish a new bi-national planning group at the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) headquarters in Colorado Springs. The new bi-national planning group is expected to release a report recommending how the militaries of U.S. and Canada can "work together more effectively to counter land-based and maritime threats." See: U.S. and Canada Sign Bi-National Agreement on Military Planning
January 2003: The Canadian Council of Chief Executives headed by Tom D'Aquino (also a member of the trinational Task Force on the Future of North America) launches the North American Security and Prosperity Initiative (NASPI) in January 2003 in response to an alleged "need for a comprehensive North American strategy integrating economic and security issues". NASPI has five main elements, which include: Reinventing borders, Maximizing regulatory efficiencies, Negotiation of a comprehensive resource security pact, Reinvigorating the North American defence alliance, and Creating a new institutional framework. See: North American Security and Prosperity Initiative (PDF).
October 21, 2003: Dr. Robert Pastor gives testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives, International Relations Committee, Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere Affairs on "U.S. Policy toward the Western Hemisphere:Challenges and Opportunities" in which he recommends the formation of a "North American Community."
January 2004: NAFTA celebrates its tenth anniversary with controversy, as it is both praised and criticized.
January/February 2004: The Council on Foreign Relations publishes Robert Pastor's paper "North America's Second Decade," which advocates further North American integration. Read it at: North America's Second Decade
April 2004: The Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) publishes a major discussion paper titled "New Frontiers: Building a 21st Century Canada-United States Partnership in North America." Some of the paper’s 15 recommendations expand on the NASPI framework in areas such as tariff harmonization, rules of origin, trade remedies, energy strategy, core defence priorities and the need to strengthen Canada-United States institutions, including the North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD). Other recommendations focus on the process for developing and executing a comprehensive strategy, including the need for greater coordination across government departments, between federal and provincial governments and between the public and private sectors. See: Building a 21st Century Canada-United States Partnership in North America
October 2004: The Canada-Mexico Partnership (CMP) is launched during the visit of President Vicente Fox to Ottawa. See: Canada-Mexico Partnership (CMP)
November 1, 2004: The Independent Task Force on the Future of North America is formed. The task force is a trilateral task force charged with developing a "roadmap" to promote North American security and advance the well-being of citizens of all three countries. The task force is chaired by former Liberal Deputy Prime Minister John Manley. It is sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in association with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) and the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales.
December 29, 2004: The Safe Third Country Agreement comes into force. See: Safe Third Country Agreement Comes Into Force Today
March 2005: The Independent Task Force on the Future of North America releases "Creating a North American Community - Chairmen’s Statement." Three former high-ranking government officials from Canada, Mexico, and the United States call for a North American economic and security community by 2010 to address shared security threats, challenges to competitiveness, and interest in broad-based development across the three countries. See: Creating a North American Community Chairmen’s Statement
March 14, 2005: Robert Pastor, author of "Toward a North American Community" and member of the task force on the future of North America, publishes an article titled "The Paramount Challenge for North America: Closing the Development Gap," sponsored by the North American Development Bank, which recommends forming a North American Community as a way to address economic inequalities due to NAFTA between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. See: THE PARAMOUNT CHALLENGE FOR NORTH AMERICA: CLOSING THE DEVELOPMENT GAP (PDF)
March 23, 2005: The leaders of Canada, the United States and Mexico sign the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America at the trilateral summit in Waco, Texas. Canada is signed on by Prime Minister Paul Martin. See: www.spp.gov.
March 24, 2005: The 40 Point Smart Regulation Plan is launched as part of the SPP agreement. It is a far-reaching plan to introduce huge changes to Canada's regulatory system in order to eliminate some regulations and harmonize other regulations with the U.S. Reg Alcock, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board, launches the Government of Canada's implementation plan for Smart Regulation at a Newsmaker Breakfast at the National Press Club. For the original plan and updates see: Smart Regulation: Report on Actions and Plans
March 2005: Agreement to build the Texas NAFTA Superhighway: “A ‘Comprehensive Development Agreement’ [is] signed by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) to build the ‘TTC-35 High Priority Corridor’ parallel to Interstate 35. The contracting party involved a limited partnership formed between Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, S.A., a publically listed company headquartered in Spain, owned by the Madrid-based Groupo Ferrovial, and a San Antonio-based construction company, Zachry Construction Corp.” Texas Segment of NAFTA Super Highway Nears Construction, Jerome R. Corsi, June 2006, www.Humaneventsonline.com The proposed NAFTA superhighway will be a 10 lane super highway four football fields wide that will travel through the heart of the U.S. along Interstate 35, from the Mexican border at Laredo, Tex., to the Canadian border north of Duluth. Minn. The "Trans-Texas Corridor" or TTC will be the first leg of the NAFTA superhighway.
April 2005: U.S. Senate Bill 853 is introduced by Senator Richard G. Lugar (IN) and six cosponsors. “The North American Security Cooperative Act (NASCA) is touted as a bill to protect the American public from terrorists by creating the North American Union. The North American Union consists of three countries, U.S., Canada, and Mexico, with open borders, something that is proposed to be in effect by 2010. Thus, it would ensure the fulfillment of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.” NASCA Rips America, April 2005, www.Freemarketnews.com
May 2005: The Council on Foreign Relations Press publishes the report of the Independent Task Force on the Future of North America, titled "Building a North American Community" (task force report 53). See: Building a North American Community
June 2005: A follow-up SPP meeting is held in Ottawa, Canada.
June 2005: A U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee policy paper is released: “The CFR did not mention the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), but it is obvious that it is part of the scheme. This was made clear by the Senate Republican Policy Committee policy paper released in June 2005. It argued that Congress should pass CAFTA … The Senate Republican policy paper argued that CAFTA ‘will promote democratic governance.’But there is nothing democratic about CAFTA’s many pages of grants of vague authority to foreign tribunals on which foreign judges can force us to change our domestic laws to be ‘no more burdensome than necessary’on foreign trade.” CFR's Plan to Integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada, July 2005, www.Eagleforum.org
June 9, 2005: CNN's Lou Dobbs, reporting on Dr. Robert Pastor's congressional testimony as one of the six co-chairmen of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Independent Task Force on North America, began his evening broadcast with this announcement: "Good evening, everybody. Tonight, an astonishing proposal to expand our borders to incorporate Mexico and Canada and simultaneously further diminish U.S. sovereignty. Have our political elites gone mad?"
July 2005: The Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) passes in the U.S. House of Representatives by a 217-215 vote.
November 2005: Canadian Action Party leader Connie Fogal publishes an article called "Summary and Part 1:The Metamorphosis and Sabotage of Canada by Our Own Government- The North American Union." See Summary and Part 1:The Metamorphosis and Sabotage of Canada by Our Own Government The North American Union
January 2006: Conservative Stephen Harper is elected Prime Minister of Canada with a minority government.
March 31, 2006: At the Summit of the Americas in Cancun, Canada (under new Prime Minister Stephen Harper) along with the U.S. and Mexico release the Leaders' Joint Statement. The statement presents six action points to move toward a North American Union, aka a North American Community. These action points include: 1) Establishment of a Trilateral Regulatory Cooperative Framework 2) Establishment of the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC) 3) Provision for North American Emergency Management 4) Provision for Avian and Human Pandemic Influenza Management 5) Development of North American Energy Security 6) Assure Smart, Secure North American Borders. Read the full statement at: Leaders' Joint Statement
April 2006: A draft environmental impact statement on the proposed first leg of the "NAFTA superhighway", the "Trans-Texas Corridor" or TTC, is completed.
June 2006: Tom Tancredo, R-Colorado. demands superstate accounting from the Bush administration: “Responding to a Worldnetdaily.com report, Tom Tancredo is demanding the Bush administration fully disclose the activities of an office implementing a trilateral agreement with Mexico and Canada that apparently could lead to a North American union, despite having no authorization from Congress.” Tancredo Confronts 'Super-State' Effort, June 2006, www.Worldnetdaily.com
June 15, 2006: U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez convenes the first meeting of the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC), the advisory group organized by the Department of Commerce (DOC) under the auspices of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and announced by the leaders of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico on March 31, 2006.
July 2006: Public hearings on the proposed "NAFTA superhighway" begin in the U.S.
July 25, 2006: The article "Meet Robert Pastor, Father of the North American Union" is published. See: Meet Robert Pastor: Father of the North American Union
August 21, 2006: An article titled North American Union Threatens U.S. Sovereignty" is posted to informationliberation.com.
August 27, 2006: Patrick Wood (U.S.) publishes an article titled "Toward a North American Union" for The August Review. See: Toward a North American Union
August 28, 2006: A North American United Nations? by Republican Congressman Ron Paul (Texas) is published. See: A North American United Nations?
August 29, 2006: Patrick Buchanan (U.S.) criticizes a North American union in his article "The NAFTA super highway." See: The NAFTA super highway
September 12-14, 2006: A secret "North American Forum" on integration is held at the Fairmont Banff Springs Hotel. Elite participants from Canada, the U.S. and Mexico are present. It is ignored by the mainstream media. See the Vive le Canada.ca article for the secret agenda and participant list: Deep Integration Planned at Secret Conference Ignored by the Media
September 13, 2006: A Maclean's article on integration notes that according to Ron Covais, the president of the Americas for defence giant Lockheed Martin, a former Pentagon adviser to Dick Cheney, and one of the architects of North American integration, the political will to make deep integration of the continent happen will last only for "less than two years". According to the article, to make sure that the establishment of a North American Union will take place in that time, "The executives have boiled their priorities down to three: the Canadian CEOs are focusing on 'border crossing facilitation,' the Americans have taken on 'regulatory convergence,' and the Mexicans are looking at 'energy integration' in everything from electrical grids to the locating of liquid natural gas terminals. They plan to present recommendations to the ministers in October. This is how the future of North America now promises to be written: not in a sweeping trade agreement on which elections will turn, but by the accretion of hundreds of incremental changes implemented by executive agencies, bureaucracies and regulators. 'We've decided not to recommend any things that would require legislative changes,' says Covais. 'Because we won't get anywhere.' " See: Meet NAFTA 2.0
COMING IN 2007: Construction is set to begin on the "NAFTA superhighway".
COMING IN 2007: Another trilateral meeting, to be held in Canada. The six actions towards creating a North American Union (NAU)aka a North American Community as set out in the Cancun Leaders' Statement will have been taken in part or in full. Regarding regulations, according to the statement: "We affirm our commitment to strengthen regulatory cooperation in [food safety] and other key sectors and to have our central regulatory agencies complete a trilateral regulatory cooperation framework by 2007."
Sources aside from articles provided within the timeline:
Vive le Canada.ca, FAQ, Sovereignty vs Deep Integration
North American Forum on Integration, NAFTA Timeline
North American Union/Testimony, Publications and Reports, Sourcewatch, a project of the Center for Media and Democracy, North American Union/Testimony, Publications and Reports
Free Market News Network Corp, N. AM. UNION TIMELINE
Wikipedia, various entries, Wikipedia.org
Timeline of the Progress Toward a North American Union
Canadian, U.S., and Mexican elites, including CEOS and politicians, have a plan to create common North American policies and further integrate our economies. This plan goes by various names and euphemisms, such as "deep integration", "NAFTA-plus", "harmonization", the "Big Idea", the "Grand Bargain", and the "North American Security and Prosperity Initiative". Regardless of which name your prefer, the end goal of all of these plans is to create a new political and economic entity that would supercede the existing countries. Advocates refer to it as a "North American Community", but it is also known as the North American Union (NAU). Theoretically, it would be similar to and competetive with the European Union (EU). The individual currencies of each country would be replaced by a common currency called the "Amero" and everything from environmental regulations to security would be brought in line with a common standard.
Vive le Canada.ca offers the following timeline as a resource to educate the general public about the progress of the three countries toward a new North American Union (NAU).
Vive le Canada.ca opposes the creation of the North American Union (NAU) because we believe it will mean the loss of Canadian sovereignty and democracy and hand over more power to giant, unelected corporations. We also believe that unlike the EU, the countries joining the NAU are not roughly equal in size and power and that this means the U.S. will most certainly be setting policy for all three countries. Considering the unpopularity of the Bush administration and its policies in the U.S., Canada, and around the world we believe that erasing the borders between our countries and adopting U.S. policies at this time is a bad idea and will create economic, political and military insecurity in this country. We hope that raising awareness about the plan to create a North American Union (NAU) will create opposition and encourage debate in all three countries, but especially in Canada.
Note: This timeline is a work in progress and will be updated as events progress. If you notice a correction that needs to be made or an event that should be included, please email susan.thompson@vivelecanada.ca
Timeline
1921: The Council on Foreign Relations is founded by Edward Mandell House, who had been the chief advisor of President Woodrow Wilson.
1973: David Rockefeller asks Zbigniew Brzezinski and a few others, including from the Brookings Institution, Council on Foreign Relations and the Ford Foundation, to put together an organization of the top political, and business leaders from around the world. He calls this group the Trilateral Commission (TC). The first meeting of the group is held in Tokyo in October. See: Trilateral Commission FAQ
1974: Richard Gardner, one of the members of the Trilateral Commission, publishes an article titled "The Hard Road to World Order" which appeared in Foreign Affairs magazine, published by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). In the article he wrote: "In short, the 'house of world order' would have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing confusion,' to use William James' famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault." Gardner advocated treaties and trade agreements as a means of creating a new economic world order. See: The Hard Road to World Order
November 13, 1979: While officially declaring his candidacy for U.S. President, Ronald Reagan proposes a “North American Agreement” which will produce “a North American continent in which the goods and people of the three countries will cross boundaries more freely.”
January 1981: U.S. President Ronald Reagan proposes a North American common market.
September 4, 1984: Conservative Brian Mulroney is elected Prime Minister of Canada after opposing free trade during the campaign.
September 25, 1984: Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney meets President Reagan in Washington and promises closer relations with the US.
October 9, 1984: The US Congress adopts the Trade and Tariff Act, an omnibus trade act that notably extends the powers of the president to concede trade benefits and enter into bilateral free trade agreements. The Act would be passed on October 30, 1984.
1985: A Canadian Royal Commission on the economy chaired by former Liberal Minister of Finance Donald S. Macdonald issues a report to the Government of Canada recommending free trade with the United States.
St. Patrick's Day, 1985: Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and President Ronald Reagan sing "When Irish Eyes Are Smiling" together to cap off the "Shamrock Summit", a 24-hour meeting in Quebec City that opened the door to future free trade talks between the countries. Commentator Eric Kierans observed that "The general impression you get, is that our prime minister invited his boss home for dinner." Canadian historian Jack Granatstein said that this "public display of sucking up to Reagan may have been the single most demeaning moment in the entire political history of Canada's relations with the United States."
September 26, 1985: Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney announces that Canada will try to reach a free trade agreement with the US.
December 10, 1985: U.S. President Reagan officially informs Congress about his intention to negotiate a free trade agreement with Canada under the authority of trade promotion. Referred to as fast track, trade promotion authority is an accelerated legislative procedure which obliges the House of Representatives and the Senate to decide within 90 days whether or not to establish a trade trade unit. No amendments are permitted.
May 1986: Canadian and American negotiators begin to work out a free trade deal. The Canadian team is led by former deputy Minister of Finance Simon Reisman and the American side by Peter O. Murphy, the former deputy United States trade representative in Geneva.
October 3, 1987: The 20-chapter Canada–United States Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA or FTA) is finalized. U.S. trade representative Clayton Yeutter offers this observation: "We've signed a stunning new trade pact with Canada. The Canadians don't understand what they've signed. In twenty years, they will be sucked into the U.S. economy."
November 6, 1987: Signing of a framework agreement between the US and Mexico.
January 2, 1988: Prime Minister Mulroney and President Reagan officially sign the FTA.
January 1, 1989: The Canada US Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA or FTA) goes into effect.
June 10, 1990: Presidents Bush (U.S.) and Salinas (Mexico) announce that they will begin discussions aimed at liberalizing trade between their countries.
August 21, 1990: Mexican President Salinas officially proposes to the US president the negotiation of a free trade agreement between Mexico and the US.
February 5, 1991: Negotiations between the US and Mexico aimed at liberalizing trade between the two countries officially become trilateral at the request of the Canadian government under Brian Mulroney.
April 7 to 10, 1991: Cooperation agreements are signed between Mexico and Canada covering taxation, cultural production and exports.
May 24, 1991: The American Senate endorses the extension of fast track authority in order to facilitate the negotiation of free trade with Mexico.
June 12, 1991: Start of trade negotiations between Canada, the US and Mexico.
April 4, 1992 Signing in Mexico by Canada and Mexico of a protocol agreement on cooperation projects regarding labour.
August 12, 1992: Signing of an agreement in principle on NAFTA.
September 17, 1992: Creation of a trilateral commission responsible for examining cooperation in the area of the environment.
October 7, 1992: Official signing of NAFTA by Michael Wilson of Canada (minister), American ambassador Carla Hills and Mexican secretary Jaime Serra Puche, in San Antonio (Texas).
December 17, 1992: Official signing of NAFTA by Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, US president George Bush, and Mexican president Carlos Salinas de Gortari, subject to its final approval by the federal Parliaments of the three countries.
March 17 and 18, 1993: Start of tripartite discussions in Washington aimed at reaching subsidiary agreements covering labor and the environment.
September 14, 1993: Official signing of parallel agreements covering labor and the environment in the capitals of the three countries.
1993: The Liberal Party under Jean Chretien promises to renegotiate NAFTA in its campaign platform, titled "Creating Opportunity: the Liberal Plan for Canada" and also known as The Red Book.
December 1993: Newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien signs NAFTA without changes, breaking his promise to renegotiate NAFTA. U.S. President Bill Clinton signs NAFTA for the U.S.
November 1993: The North American Development Bank (NADB) and its sister institution, the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC), are created under the auspices of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to address environmental issues in the U.S.-Mexico border region. The two institutions initiate operations under the November 1993 Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the United Mexican States Concerning the Establishment of a Border Environment Cooperation Commission and a North American Development Bank (the “Charter”). See: About Us (The North American Development Bank)
January 1, 1994: NAFTA and the two agreements on labour and the environment go into effect, replacing CUSFTA.
November 16, 1994: Canada and Mexico sign a cooperation agreement regarding the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
December 1994: The Summit of the Americas is held in Miami. The three signatories of NAFTA officially invite Chile to become a contractual party of the agreement. The Free Trade Area of the Americas or FTAA is initiated. According to the offical FTAA website, "the Heads of State and Government of the 34 democracies in the region agreed to construct a Free Trade Area of the Americas, or FTAA, in which barriers to trade and investment will be progressively eliminated. They agreed to complete negotiations towards this agreement by the year 2005 and to achieve substantial progress toward building the FTAA by 2000." See: FTAA
December 22, 1994: Mexican monetary authorities decide to let the Peso float. The US and Canada open a US$6 billion line of credit for Mexico.
January 3, 1995: Mexican president Ernesto Zedillo presents an emergency plan.
January 1995: President Clinton announces an aid plan for Mexico.
February 9, 1995: Mickey Kantor, the US Foreign Trade representative, announces Washington’s intention to include the provisions of NAFTA regarding labor and the environment in negotiations with Chile.
February 21, 1995: Signing in Washington of an agreement regarding the financial assistance given to Mexico. Mexico in turn promises to pay Mexican oil export revenue as a guarantee into an account at the Federal Reserve in New York.
February 28, 1995: Mexico announces the increase of its customs duties on a number of imports from countries with which it does not have a free trade agreement.
March 9, 1995: President Zedillo presents austerity measures. The plan envisages a 50% increase in value added taxes, a 10% reduction of government expenditure, a 35% increase in gas prices, a 20% increase in electricity prices and a 100% increase in transportation prices. The minimum wage is increased by 10%. The private sector can benefit from government assistance. The inter-bank rate that is reduced to 74% will be increased to 109% on March 15.
March 29, 1995: Statistical data on US foreign trade confirms the sharp increase in Mexican exports to the US.
April 10, 1995: The US dollar reaches its lowest level in history on the international market. It depreciated by 50% relative to the Japanese yen in only four years.
June 7, 1995: First meeting of the ministers of Foreign Trade of Canada (Roy MacLaren), the US (Mickey Kantor), Mexico (Herminio Blanco) and Chile (Eduardo Aninat) to start negotiations.
December 29, 1995: Chile and Canada commit to negotiate a bilateral free trade agreement.
June 3, 1996: Chile and Canada start negotiating the reciprocal opening of markets in Santiago.
November 18, 1996: Signing in Ottawa of the Canada-Chile free trade agreement by Jean Chrétien, Prime Minister of Canada and Eduardo Frei, President of Chile. The agreement frees 80% of trade between the two countries. It is the first free trade agreement signed between Chile and a member of the G 7.
July 4, 1997: The Canada-Chile free trade agreement comes into effect.
1997: The US presidency proposes applying NAFTA parity to Caribbean countries.
April 17, 1998: Signing in Santiago, Chile of the free trade agreement between Chile and Mexico by President Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de León of Mexico, and President Eduardo Frei of Chile.
August 1, 1999: The Chile-Mexico free trade agreement comes into effect.
September, 1999: The Canadian right-wing think tank the Fraser Institute publishes a paper by Herbert G. Grubel titled "The Case for the Amero: The Economics and Politics of a North American Monetary Union." In the paper Grubel argues that a common currency is not inevitable but it is desirable. See: The Case for the Amero
July 2, 2000: Vicente Fox Quesada of the National Action Party (PAN), is elected president of Mexico, thus ending the reign of the Revolutionary Institutional Party (RIP) that had held power for 71 years. Mr. Fox is sworn in on 1 December 2000.
July 4, 2000: Mexican president Vicente Fox proposes a 20 to 30 year timeline for the creation of a common North American market. President Fox’s “20/20 vision” as it is commonly called, includes the following: a customs union, a common external tariff, greater coordination of policies, common monetary policies, free flow of labor, and fiscal transfers for the development of poor Mexican regions. With the model of the European Fund in mind, President Fox suggests that US$10 to 30 billion be invested in NAFTA to support underdeveloped regions. The fund could be administered by an international financial institution such as the Inter-American Development Bank.
November 27, 2000: Trade negotiations resume between the US and Chile for Chile’s possible entry into NAFTA.
2001: Robert Pastor's 2001 book "Toward a North American Community" is published. The book calls for the creation of a North American Union (NAU).
April 2001: Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien and US President George W. Bush sign the Declaration of Quebec City at the third Summit of the Americas: “This is a ‘commitment to hemispheric integration." See: Declaration of Quebec City
August 30, 2001: The Institute for International Economics issues a press release advocating that the United States and Mexico should use the occasion of the visit of President Vicente Fox of Mexico on September 4-7 to develop a North American Community as advocated by Robert Pastor in his book "Toward a North American Community." See: A Blueprint for a North American Community
September 11, 2001: A series of coordinated suicide terrorist attacks upon the United States, predominantly targeting civilians, are carried out on Tuesday, September 11, 2001. Two planes (United Airlines Flight 175 and American Airlines Flight 11) crashed into the World Trade Center in New York City, one plane into each tower (One and Two). Both towers collapsed within two hours. The pilot of the third team crashed a plane into the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia. Passengers and members of the flight crew on the fourth aircraft attempted to retake control of their plane from the hijackers; that plane crashed into a field near the town of Shanksville in rural Somerset County, Pennsylvania. Excluding the 19 hijackers, a confirmed 2,973 people died and another 24 remain listed as missing as a result of these attacks. In response, the Bush administration launches the "war on terror" and becomes very concerned with security.
December 2001: New U.S. Ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci publicly advocates "NAFTA-plus". See: The Emergence of a North American Community?
December 2001: U.S. Governor Tom Ridge and Canadian Deputy Prime Minister John Manley sign the Smart Border Declaration and Associated 30-Point Action Plan to Enhance the Security of Our Shared Border While Facilitating the Legitimate Flow of People and Goods. The Action Plan has four pillars: the secure flow of people, the secure flow of goods, secure infrastructure, and information. It includes shared customs data, a safe third-country agreement, harmonized commercial processing, etc.
February 7, 2002: Robert Pastor gives invited testimony before the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade, House of Commons, Government of Canada, Ottawa. See: INVITED TESTIMONY OF DR. ROBERT A. PASTOR
April 2002: The Canadian right-wing think tank the C.D. Howe Institute publishes the first paper in the "Border Papers" series, which they have described as "a project on Canada's choices regarding North American integration." The Border Papers were published with the financial backing of the Donner Canadian Foundation. Generally the border papers advocate deep integration between Canada and the U.S., and the first border paper "Shaping the Future of the North American Economic Space: A Framework for Action" by Wendy Dobson popularized the term "the Big Idea" as one euphemism for deep integration. To read the border papers, you can visit the C.D. Howe Institute website at www.cdhowe.org. Use the publication search form (1996 to current, PDF) and choose "border papers" from the "Serie contains" drop down menu.
September 9, 2002: President Bush and Prime Minister Chrétien meet to discuss progress on the Smart Border Action Plan and ask that they be updated regularly on the work being done to harmonize our common border.
December 5, 2002: The text of the Safe Third Country Agreement is signed by officials of Canada and the United States as part of the Smart Border Action Plan. See the final text here: Final Text of the Safe Third Country Agreement Refugee support groups on both sides of the Canadian-U.S. border criticize the new agreement dealing with refugees for stipulating that refugees must seek asylum in whichever of the two countries they reach first. Critics say that preventing individuals who first set foot in the U.S. from making a claim in Canada will increase cases of human smuggling, and that other refugees will be forced to live without any kind of legal status in the U.S. See for example: 10 Reasons Why Safe Third Country is a Bad Deal
September 11, 2002: The National Post publishes an article by Alan Gotlieb, the chairman of the Donner Canadian Foundation and Canada's ambassador to the United States from 1981 to 1989, titled "Why not a grand bargain with the U.S.?" In the article, Gotlieb asks "Rather than eschewing further integration with the United States, shouldn't we be building on NAFTA to create new rules, new tribunals, new institutions to secure our trade? Wouldn't this 'legal integration' be superior to ad hoc responses and largely ineffective lobbying to prevent harm from Congressional protectionist sorties? Wouldn't our economic security be enhanced by establishing a single North American competitive market without anti-dumping and countervail rules? Are there not elements of a grand bargain to be struck, combining North American economic, defence and security arrangements within a common perimeter?" See: Why not a grand bargain with the U.S.?
November 1-2, 2002: Robert Pastor presents "A North American Community. A Modest Proposal To the Trilateral Commission," to the North American Regional Meeting, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Pastor called for implementation of "a series of political proposals which would have authority over the sovereignty of the United States, Canada and Mexico. ... the creation of North American passports and a North American Customs and Immigrations, which would have authority over U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) within the Department of Homeland Security. A North American Parliamentary Group would oversee the U.S. Congress. A Permanent Court on Trade and Investment would resolve disputes within NAFTA, exerting final authority over the judgments of the U.S. Supreme Court. A North American Commission would 'develop an integrated continental plan for transportation and infrastructure.'" See: A North American Community. A Modest Proposal To the Trilateral Commission
December 6, 2002: The White House issues an update on the progress of the Smart Border Action Plan. See: U.S. Canada Smart Border 30 Point Action Plan Update
December, 2002: US Secretary Colin Powell signs an agreement between the United States and Canada to establish a new bi-national planning group at the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) headquarters in Colorado Springs. The new bi-national planning group is expected to release a report recommending how the militaries of U.S. and Canada can "work together more effectively to counter land-based and maritime threats." See: U.S. and Canada Sign Bi-National Agreement on Military Planning
January 2003: The Canadian Council of Chief Executives headed by Tom D'Aquino (also a member of the trinational Task Force on the Future of North America) launches the North American Security and Prosperity Initiative (NASPI) in January 2003 in response to an alleged "need for a comprehensive North American strategy integrating economic and security issues". NASPI has five main elements, which include: Reinventing borders, Maximizing regulatory efficiencies, Negotiation of a comprehensive resource security pact, Reinvigorating the North American defence alliance, and Creating a new institutional framework. See: North American Security and Prosperity Initiative (PDF).
October 21, 2003: Dr. Robert Pastor gives testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives, International Relations Committee, Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere Affairs on "U.S. Policy toward the Western Hemisphere:Challenges and Opportunities" in which he recommends the formation of a "North American Community."
January 2004: NAFTA celebrates its tenth anniversary with controversy, as it is both praised and criticized.
January/February 2004: The Council on Foreign Relations publishes Robert Pastor's paper "North America's Second Decade," which advocates further North American integration. Read it at: North America's Second Decade
April 2004: The Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) publishes a major discussion paper titled "New Frontiers: Building a 21st Century Canada-United States Partnership in North America." Some of the paper’s 15 recommendations expand on the NASPI framework in areas such as tariff harmonization, rules of origin, trade remedies, energy strategy, core defence priorities and the need to strengthen Canada-United States institutions, including the North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD). Other recommendations focus on the process for developing and executing a comprehensive strategy, including the need for greater coordination across government departments, between federal and provincial governments and between the public and private sectors. See: Building a 21st Century Canada-United States Partnership in North America
October 2004: The Canada-Mexico Partnership (CMP) is launched during the visit of President Vicente Fox to Ottawa. See: Canada-Mexico Partnership (CMP)
November 1, 2004: The Independent Task Force on the Future of North America is formed. The task force is a trilateral task force charged with developing a "roadmap" to promote North American security and advance the well-being of citizens of all three countries. The task force is chaired by former Liberal Deputy Prime Minister John Manley. It is sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in association with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) and the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales.
December 29, 2004: The Safe Third Country Agreement comes into force. See: Safe Third Country Agreement Comes Into Force Today
March 2005: The Independent Task Force on the Future of North America releases "Creating a North American Community - Chairmen’s Statement." Three former high-ranking government officials from Canada, Mexico, and the United States call for a North American economic and security community by 2010 to address shared security threats, challenges to competitiveness, and interest in broad-based development across the three countries. See: Creating a North American Community Chairmen’s Statement
March 14, 2005: Robert Pastor, author of "Toward a North American Community" and member of the task force on the future of North America, publishes an article titled "The Paramount Challenge for North America: Closing the Development Gap," sponsored by the North American Development Bank, which recommends forming a North American Community as a way to address economic inequalities due to NAFTA between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. See: THE PARAMOUNT CHALLENGE FOR NORTH AMERICA: CLOSING THE DEVELOPMENT GAP (PDF)
March 23, 2005: The leaders of Canada, the United States and Mexico sign the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America at the trilateral summit in Waco, Texas. Canada is signed on by Prime Minister Paul Martin. See: www.spp.gov.
March 24, 2005: The 40 Point Smart Regulation Plan is launched as part of the SPP agreement. It is a far-reaching plan to introduce huge changes to Canada's regulatory system in order to eliminate some regulations and harmonize other regulations with the U.S. Reg Alcock, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board, launches the Government of Canada's implementation plan for Smart Regulation at a Newsmaker Breakfast at the National Press Club. For the original plan and updates see: Smart Regulation: Report on Actions and Plans
March 2005: Agreement to build the Texas NAFTA Superhighway: “A ‘Comprehensive Development Agreement’ [is] signed by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) to build the ‘TTC-35 High Priority Corridor’ parallel to Interstate 35. The contracting party involved a limited partnership formed between Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, S.A., a publically listed company headquartered in Spain, owned by the Madrid-based Groupo Ferrovial, and a San Antonio-based construction company, Zachry Construction Corp.” Texas Segment of NAFTA Super Highway Nears Construction, Jerome R. Corsi, June 2006, www.Humaneventsonline.com The proposed NAFTA superhighway will be a 10 lane super highway four football fields wide that will travel through the heart of the U.S. along Interstate 35, from the Mexican border at Laredo, Tex., to the Canadian border north of Duluth. Minn. The "Trans-Texas Corridor" or TTC will be the first leg of the NAFTA superhighway.
April 2005: U.S. Senate Bill 853 is introduced by Senator Richard G. Lugar (IN) and six cosponsors. “The North American Security Cooperative Act (NASCA) is touted as a bill to protect the American public from terrorists by creating the North American Union. The North American Union consists of three countries, U.S., Canada, and Mexico, with open borders, something that is proposed to be in effect by 2010. Thus, it would ensure the fulfillment of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.” NASCA Rips America, April 2005, www.Freemarketnews.com
May 2005: The Council on Foreign Relations Press publishes the report of the Independent Task Force on the Future of North America, titled "Building a North American Community" (task force report 53). See: Building a North American Community
June 2005: A follow-up SPP meeting is held in Ottawa, Canada.
June 2005: A U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee policy paper is released: “The CFR did not mention the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), but it is obvious that it is part of the scheme. This was made clear by the Senate Republican Policy Committee policy paper released in June 2005. It argued that Congress should pass CAFTA … The Senate Republican policy paper argued that CAFTA ‘will promote democratic governance.’But there is nothing democratic about CAFTA’s many pages of grants of vague authority to foreign tribunals on which foreign judges can force us to change our domestic laws to be ‘no more burdensome than necessary’on foreign trade.” CFR's Plan to Integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada, July 2005, www.Eagleforum.org
June 9, 2005: CNN's Lou Dobbs, reporting on Dr. Robert Pastor's congressional testimony as one of the six co-chairmen of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Independent Task Force on North America, began his evening broadcast with this announcement: "Good evening, everybody. Tonight, an astonishing proposal to expand our borders to incorporate Mexico and Canada and simultaneously further diminish U.S. sovereignty. Have our political elites gone mad?"
July 2005: The Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) passes in the U.S. House of Representatives by a 217-215 vote.
November 2005: Canadian Action Party leader Connie Fogal publishes an article called "Summary and Part 1:The Metamorphosis and Sabotage of Canada by Our Own Government- The North American Union." See Summary and Part 1:The Metamorphosis and Sabotage of Canada by Our Own Government The North American Union
January 2006: Conservative Stephen Harper is elected Prime Minister of Canada with a minority government.
March 31, 2006: At the Summit of the Americas in Cancun, Canada (under new Prime Minister Stephen Harper) along with the U.S. and Mexico release the Leaders' Joint Statement. The statement presents six action points to move toward a North American Union, aka a North American Community. These action points include: 1) Establishment of a Trilateral Regulatory Cooperative Framework 2) Establishment of the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC) 3) Provision for North American Emergency Management 4) Provision for Avian and Human Pandemic Influenza Management 5) Development of North American Energy Security 6) Assure Smart, Secure North American Borders. Read the full statement at: Leaders' Joint Statement
April 2006: A draft environmental impact statement on the proposed first leg of the "NAFTA superhighway", the "Trans-Texas Corridor" or TTC, is completed.
June 2006: Tom Tancredo, R-Colorado. demands superstate accounting from the Bush administration: “Responding to a Worldnetdaily.com report, Tom Tancredo is demanding the Bush administration fully disclose the activities of an office implementing a trilateral agreement with Mexico and Canada that apparently could lead to a North American union, despite having no authorization from Congress.” Tancredo Confronts 'Super-State' Effort, June 2006, www.Worldnetdaily.com
June 15, 2006: U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez convenes the first meeting of the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC), the advisory group organized by the Department of Commerce (DOC) under the auspices of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and announced by the leaders of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico on March 31, 2006.
July 2006: Public hearings on the proposed "NAFTA superhighway" begin in the U.S.
July 25, 2006: The article "Meet Robert Pastor, Father of the North American Union" is published. See: Meet Robert Pastor: Father of the North American Union
August 21, 2006: An article titled North American Union Threatens U.S. Sovereignty" is posted to informationliberation.com.
August 27, 2006: Patrick Wood (U.S.) publishes an article titled "Toward a North American Union" for The August Review. See: Toward a North American Union
August 28, 2006: A North American United Nations? by Republican Congressman Ron Paul (Texas) is published. See: A North American United Nations?
August 29, 2006: Patrick Buchanan (U.S.) criticizes a North American union in his article "The NAFTA super highway." See: The NAFTA super highway
September 12-14, 2006: A secret "North American Forum" on integration is held at the Fairmont Banff Springs Hotel. Elite participants from Canada, the U.S. and Mexico are present. It is ignored by the mainstream media. See the Vive le Canada.ca article for the secret agenda and participant list: Deep Integration Planned at Secret Conference Ignored by the Media
September 13, 2006: A Maclean's article on integration notes that according to Ron Covais, the president of the Americas for defence giant Lockheed Martin, a former Pentagon adviser to Dick Cheney, and one of the architects of North American integration, the political will to make deep integration of the continent happen will last only for "less than two years". According to the article, to make sure that the establishment of a North American Union will take place in that time, "The executives have boiled their priorities down to three: the Canadian CEOs are focusing on 'border crossing facilitation,' the Americans have taken on 'regulatory convergence,' and the Mexicans are looking at 'energy integration' in everything from electrical grids to the locating of liquid natural gas terminals. They plan to present recommendations to the ministers in October. This is how the future of North America now promises to be written: not in a sweeping trade agreement on which elections will turn, but by the accretion of hundreds of incremental changes implemented by executive agencies, bureaucracies and regulators. 'We've decided not to recommend any things that would require legislative changes,' says Covais. 'Because we won't get anywhere.' " See: Meet NAFTA 2.0
COMING IN 2007: Construction is set to begin on the "NAFTA superhighway".
COMING IN 2007: Another trilateral meeting, to be held in Canada. The six actions towards creating a North American Union (NAU)aka a North American Community as set out in the Cancun Leaders' Statement will have been taken in part or in full. Regarding regulations, according to the statement: "We affirm our commitment to strengthen regulatory cooperation in [food safety] and other key sectors and to have our central regulatory agencies complete a trilateral regulatory cooperation framework by 2007."
Sources aside from articles provided within the timeline:
Vive le Canada.ca, FAQ, Sovereignty vs Deep Integration
North American Forum on Integration, NAFTA Timeline
North American Union/Testimony, Publications and Reports, Sourcewatch, a project of the Center for Media and Democracy, North American Union/Testimony, Publications and Reports
Free Market News Network Corp, N. AM. UNION TIMELINE
Wikipedia, various entries, Wikipedia.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)