A gang of cabinet ministers and bureaucrats from both sides of the border has spent much of the summer working to craft a historic overhaul of Canada-U.S. relations.
Some 32 different aspects of that relationship are under negotiation in the perimeter security talks and most of the heavy lifting is being done under the radar.
At this point, that is understandable.
But at some point the Harper government is going to have to come out of the bunker and level with the Canadian electorate on the messy parts of such huge negotiations.
When it does, it will be clear the toughest piece of this puzzle rests with Vic Toews.
It is the security piece that is driving the American agenda, while the Canadian agenda is dominated by facilitating trade and easing the flow of goods across the border.
It will fall to the public safety minister to hold the line on what many Canadians consider to be the perils of these talks — a potential loss of sovereignty, a sell-out of our privacy rights and a lack of transparency.
As he prepares for a Monday meeting in Winnipeg with his U.S. counterpart, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Toews addressed all three concerns in a conversation with the Star.
Napolitano and the Obama administration are seeking greater intelligence-sharing between the two nations, but Toews says the security package will not be finalized without commensurate measures to move goods more quickly across the 49th parallel.
Simply adding another layer of security is not the point of this exercise, he says.
“The security issue is big for us, bigger for them,” Toews acknowledges. “We will accommodate them as long as we benefit on trade.’’
Attitudes in this country over a security perimeter have evolved over the past decade, since then-Senator Hillary Clinton used the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks to infamously declare “security trumps trade.”
The Canada-U.S. border began to thicken.
But Toews says the real movement in Canadian public opinion has come in the past couple of years following the 2008 recession.
Given the economic interdependence between the countries, Toews says, the recession had a “silver lining” because it awoke this nation to the need to protect its assets and livelihoods by maintaining the free flow of goods across the border.
Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart has already weighed in on her concerns in a submission to the government.
“Canadians have high expectations of privacy and a deep commitment where personal information protection is concerned,’’ she said.
She said there will likely be key differences between the two nations on matters such as the expectation of privacy from their citizens, the legal implications of transferring personal data to third parties — even the definition of personal information.
Toews seems intent in bringing her into the loop.
He says the government will bring proposals to the commissioner and allow her “important concerns’’ to be addressed.
But the Harper government is still most vulnerable when it comes to transparency.
The only public input on the deal, which was hyped as the biggest game changer on the North American continent since NAFTA, has been a poorly publicized online submission period.
There were barely 900 comments, most of them calling for greater transparency.
Toews says his government is not going to negotiate in public.
Important stakeholders have been consulted, and the government is grappling with the question of at what point to bring the broader public into the discussion.
The signs are not encouraging.
Toews has already set up the NDP as the enemy, predicting they would merely “politicize” any public hearings because they are philosophically against any trade deals and are mired in an outdated protectionist mindset.
But, in fact, the only NDP criticism so far has centred on the secretive nature of the process.
If the Harper government is not prepared to come into the daylight at some point and tell Canadians specifically what it may be negotiating away, the NDP criticism will be the predominant Canadian point of view.
For those paying attention, it likely already is.
Origin
Source: Toronto Star
Some 32 different aspects of that relationship are under negotiation in the perimeter security talks and most of the heavy lifting is being done under the radar.
At this point, that is understandable.
But at some point the Harper government is going to have to come out of the bunker and level with the Canadian electorate on the messy parts of such huge negotiations.
When it does, it will be clear the toughest piece of this puzzle rests with Vic Toews.
It is the security piece that is driving the American agenda, while the Canadian agenda is dominated by facilitating trade and easing the flow of goods across the border.
It will fall to the public safety minister to hold the line on what many Canadians consider to be the perils of these talks — a potential loss of sovereignty, a sell-out of our privacy rights and a lack of transparency.
As he prepares for a Monday meeting in Winnipeg with his U.S. counterpart, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Toews addressed all three concerns in a conversation with the Star.
Napolitano and the Obama administration are seeking greater intelligence-sharing between the two nations, but Toews says the security package will not be finalized without commensurate measures to move goods more quickly across the 49th parallel.
Simply adding another layer of security is not the point of this exercise, he says.
“The security issue is big for us, bigger for them,” Toews acknowledges. “We will accommodate them as long as we benefit on trade.’’
Attitudes in this country over a security perimeter have evolved over the past decade, since then-Senator Hillary Clinton used the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks to infamously declare “security trumps trade.”
The Canada-U.S. border began to thicken.
But Toews says the real movement in Canadian public opinion has come in the past couple of years following the 2008 recession.
Given the economic interdependence between the countries, Toews says, the recession had a “silver lining” because it awoke this nation to the need to protect its assets and livelihoods by maintaining the free flow of goods across the border.
Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart has already weighed in on her concerns in a submission to the government.
“Canadians have high expectations of privacy and a deep commitment where personal information protection is concerned,’’ she said.
She said there will likely be key differences between the two nations on matters such as the expectation of privacy from their citizens, the legal implications of transferring personal data to third parties — even the definition of personal information.
Toews seems intent in bringing her into the loop.
He says the government will bring proposals to the commissioner and allow her “important concerns’’ to be addressed.
But the Harper government is still most vulnerable when it comes to transparency.
The only public input on the deal, which was hyped as the biggest game changer on the North American continent since NAFTA, has been a poorly publicized online submission period.
There were barely 900 comments, most of them calling for greater transparency.
Toews says his government is not going to negotiate in public.
Important stakeholders have been consulted, and the government is grappling with the question of at what point to bring the broader public into the discussion.
The signs are not encouraging.
Toews has already set up the NDP as the enemy, predicting they would merely “politicize” any public hearings because they are philosophically against any trade deals and are mired in an outdated protectionist mindset.
But, in fact, the only NDP criticism so far has centred on the secretive nature of the process.
If the Harper government is not prepared to come into the daylight at some point and tell Canadians specifically what it may be negotiating away, the NDP criticism will be the predominant Canadian point of view.
For those paying attention, it likely already is.
Origin
Source: Toronto Star
No comments:
Post a Comment