The Harper government has been negotiating a comprehensive border deal with the United States. It is being presented to Canadians as an agreement that will yield greater access to the American market for Canadian exporters in return for the harmonization of Canadian security arrangements with those of the U.S. The idea is that we will benefit economically while satisfying the Americans that we are solid on the all-important issue, for them, of national security.
The Harper government makes case that the deal is necessary because Canadian exports have been and are being hampered by the thickening of the border since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001.
The case that Canadian exports to the U.S. have been harmed since 9/11 as a consequence of the implementation of new American security measures at the border is entirely bogus.
Let’s examine the facts:
In 2000, Canada exported US$230.8 billion worth of goods to the United States. In 2001, the year of the terror attacks, Canadian exports to the U.S. declined to US$216.2 billion. In 2002, there was a further decline in the export total to US$209.1 billion. The following year, however, the decline in Canadian exports to the United States halted and from 2003 through 2008, exports to the U.S. increased dramatically. In 2003, exports were worth US$221 billion; in 2004, US$256.3 billion, well above the total in 2000. In 2005, Canadian exports to the U.S. soared to US$290.3 billion, sixty billion dollars higher than the total for 2000. From there, the upward progress of Canadian exports to the United States continued unabated-----to US$302.4 billion in 2006 and US$317.1 billion in 2007, reaching a record high of US$339.4 billion in 2008. At this point, Canadian exports to the United States had soared by more than one hundred billion dollars a year above the figure for 2000. Clearly American security arrangements at the border were not holding Canadian exports in check.
In 2009, however, the value of Canadian exports to the U.S. plunged by US$113 billion dollars, to a total of US$226.2 billion, a savage drop that had vast implications for the future of the Canadian economy.
The reason for the plunge, of course, had everything to do with the great economic crash of 2008. It had absolutely nothing to do with post 9/11 U.S. security arrangements at the border.
In 2010, Canadian exports to the U.S. climbed back to US$277.6 billion, up just over fifty billion dollars from the previous year, but still over sixty billion dollars less than in 2008. While the pace of Canada’s exports to the U.S. was somewhat higher for the first half of 2011 than in the same months of 2010, the slowing pace of U.S. growth in the second half of 2011 threatens the level of demand for Canadian commodities. (The falling price of oil and the drop in the value of the Canadian dollar reflect the market’s assessment of these trends.)
When we examine the exports of Canadian products, overwhelmingly to the U.S., sector by sector, the picture becomes even clearer. The value of energy exports peaked in 2008 at C$125.7 billion. In 2010, energy exports were worth C$90.8 billion. The falling price of oil threatens to prevent a recovery in this sector. The export of automotive products peaked in 2006 at C$81.9 billion. In 2009, the export of automotive products had plunged to C$43 billion, recovering somewhat to C$56.8 billion in 2010. Exports of industrial goods and materials, made up of metals, metal ores, chemicals, plastics, fertilizers etc. peaked at C$111.3 billion in 2008, dropping sharply to C$79.1 billion in 2009 and recovering to C$96.5 billion in 2010. Forest products exports were at C$33.4 billion in 2006, plunging to C$19.5 billion in 2009 and recovering somewhat to C$21.9 billion in 2010.
While Canada has continued to have a positive balance of trade with the U.S., the Canadian surplus has plunged from a peak of US$78.3 billion in 2008 to US$21.6 billion in 2009 and US$28.5 billion in 2010. That dramatic decline has led to Canada running an overall trade deficit in goods with the rest of the world as a whole, something which has been very rare in previous decades. The overall impact of this shift is reflected in what has happened to Canada’s Current Account (balance of international payments). In 2006, Canada had a surplus in its Current Account (with the rest of the world) of C$20.5 billion. The following two years the Current Account remained in surplus, C$12.8 billion in 2007 and C$5.3 billion in 2008. Then came the plunge to a Current Account deficit of C$45.2 billion in 2009 and C$50.9 billion in 2010.
The weakness of the U.S. economy has led to the dramatic results spelled out above.
Canada is at a crossroads in its economic course, a critical historical moment. And there is precious little relevant attention to this among politicians in all political parties and the media to these developments.
The Harper government’s strategy is to promote tar sands exports and the construction of a pipeline to carry tar sands oil to be refined south of the border. Along with this, the Harperites are pushing a comprehensive border deal with the United States. The deal to be unveiled in a few weeks includes plans to share security-related information about Canadian citizens and residents with American security agencies. For the deal to be implemented, according to a report released by the Rideau Institute, “Canadian privacy laws will need to be violated or weakened”. At stake is Canadian sovereignty as Canada takes a giant step toward inclusion within an American continental security perimeter.
The Harper government will attempt to sell this agreement as necessary for Canada to enhance its exports to the U.S.
As has been shown here, the weakening of Canadian exports to the U.S. has everything to do with the economic crisis in which the United States now finds itself and nothing to do with the security measures being taken at the border by the U.S. since 9/11.
The border deal should be scrapped.
What we urgently need is a debate about Canada’s economic future. The Harper government is leading us into a dead end, emphasizing tar sands exports and an intensified effort to bet our future on the markets for Canadian commodities south of the border. For this country to succeed in the 21st century, Canadians need to face the twin realities of climate change and peak oil. Canada will succeed or fail depending on how it faces the challenges of rebuilding our cities, transportation systems and energy delivery systems. We need to establish new industries in a host of fields and to rethink our trading strategy with the rest of the world, not betting everything on deals with the Americans.
Instead of fostering the needed debate, the Harper government is tying us every more tightly aboard the chariot of a declining superpower.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Prof:
We are back to where we were in the mid'50s when the sun set on the empires of both Britain and France and we realigned ourselves. Today, it is setting on the American. But it will take a cataclysm, say a world depression or another world war to hit us upside the head and make us wake up to reality.
We may actually be on the brink of the former, and should the US blunder into a war with Iran, the latter isn't that far away.
The tragedy is, as you put it, none of our political leaders has the wisdom to see what's going on let alone the chutzpah to speak out. We are truly bereft of leaders.
But at least you raise the issue. Let's call you Jeremiah.
Happy New Year!
Jeremiah was a most unhappy person and James I take you for a realist not a woe betide thee type..well maybe a little drama never hurt. If oil stays low which the serious erosion of value this week foretells then Harper's engine starts to sputter even more. Desperation will ensue as expensive security toys for boys look increasingly frivolous in the light of increasing suffering at home. Is our boy writing hsi obituary?
Prof. Laxer: Right on the money. Delays at the border have had as much to do with aging and long-ignored infrastructure at the border as with security measures. The air pollution at border crossings is just a visible reminder of decades of wrong-headed decisions. Compare this with the replacing of the collapsed Honeymoon Bridge by the Rainbow Bridge and the building of the QEW at a time when WW2 was just a storm on the horizon. And it was done with beauty and function in mind and in the middle of the greatest depression in living memory. Anon. P.S. The QEW was intended to link the Peace Bridge also to the Defence Industries Limited at Ajax.
This is a smart blog. I mean it. You have so much knowledge about this issue, and so much passion. You also know how to make people rally behind it, obviously from the responses. Youve got a design here thats not too flashy, but makes a statement as big as what youre saying. Great job, indeed.
NCLex
This is a really good read for me, Must admit that you are one of the best bloggers I ever saw.Thanks for posting this informative article.
I'm the same way, I do my best to remain neutral. It's hard, if you communicate with the person the other person dislikes, then you fall out of favor with them! I simple can't dislike a person, just because someone else does, I just can't.Divorce lawyer in london
Post a Comment