Trade

Thursday September 19, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday September 19, 2019

Political smorgasbord doesn’t come free

Transactional politics are nothing new. That’s where a politician and/or a party offers goodies on the front end of the transaction, and the voter supports the politician/party on the back end.

September 12, 2019

It’s not unlike shopping and being drawn to sales or special deals that look especially appealing. That outfit looks good, but wait, the one next to it looks as good but it’s cheaper, or perhaps nicer in some small way. So the natural tendency is to take the one that seems better, even if the difference is marginal.

But what if the front of the special buy is fine, but you see flaws or differences once it’s unwrapped? What if you find out it needs special treatment when being cleaned, or it requires some sort of investment you weren’t expecting?

The analogy with the kind of transactional politics we’re experiencing during this election campaign isn’t perfect, but it serves the purpose. The political store has been bustling with promises, especially over the last several days, as the competing parties roll out their platforms — bit by bit — and try to be the outfit with that special something.

October 10, 2015

There’s nothing wrong with all this, to a point. It serves the purpose of offering measurable alternatives. If you don’t like the Conservative plan to expand RESPs, you can choose the Liberals because you like their plan about helping first-time home buyers. Or vice-versa. But it can be problematic when this sort of offer-of-the-day political play dominates the campaign to the exclusion of all else, and that is what’s happening right now.

It’s a veritable smorgasbord. Pick the party that has enough you like, and just vote for them? Of course, it’s not that easy. We know that not all promises are kept. Remember Justin Trudeau on electoral reform. We know that not all promises are fully explained. Andrew Scheer’s tax cuts are phased in so the maximum benefit comes only after three years. And the cost of that promise alone is $6 billion, which has to be paid for by someone — who might that be?

A big problem with many of the promises made to date is that the parties haven’t explained fully — in some cases not at all — how they will pay for their promises. That’s a critical part of understanding how parties will govern if elected. And it’s not always just about balanced budgets or deficits. It’s also about what things — like government services and support — get sacrificed in order for promises to be kept.

All smorgasbords end the same way. There’s a bill to pay. We can all stand to be reminded of that. (Hamilton Spectator) 

 

Friday August 23, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday August 23, 2019

During Ottawa visit, Pompeo attacks China for detaining 2 Canadians

May 8, 2019

Canada will have the support of the United States until the two Canadians detained in China “are returned to their families,” U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo promised Thursday while on a visit to Ottawa.

Pompeo, a high-profile member of the Trump administration, met with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his counterpart Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland ahead of the G7 summit in France this weekend.

December 12, 2018

Canada has been soliciting help from foreign allies in the ongoing dispute with China to secure the release of businessman Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, a former diplomat on leave. The two were detained in China late last year after Canadian officials arrested Chinese telecom executive Meng Wanzhou at the Vancouver airport to face possible extradition to the United States.

“Our team is focused on helping those two Canadians be released. China needs to honour the commitments it’s made to the world, and it is our expectation they’ll do so, and we’re working on it diligently,” said Pompeo during a brief photo opportunity Thursday morning.

Pompeo also made a point of insisting that the cases of Kovrig and Spavor shouldn’t be compared to Meng’s extradition case.

“[China] wants to talk about these two as if they are equivalent, as if they are morally similar, which they fundamentally are not,” he said during a media availability on Thursday afternoon.

“These are fundamentally different matters than the Canadian decision to use their due process and the rule of law to behave in a way that’s deeply consistent with the way decent nations work.”

The U.S., through a one-on-one conversation between President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping and “other diplomatic activity,” has told Beijing directly the arrest of the two Canadians was inappropriate, said Pompeo.

“We’ll continue to do that until such time as they’re home and returned to their families,” he said. (CBC)  

 

Thursday July 25, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday July 25, 2019

History the best teacher on dealing with China

While everyone’s attention has recently been focused on events of 50 years ago —i.e., the Apollo 11 mission —the world has continued to turn. Canada’s problems with China have not gone away.

October 2, 1999

So it might be wise to focus less on the moon than on more recent historic events. In May 1999, during the heat of the war in the former Yugoslavia, NATO accidentally bombed the Chinese Embassy there. Tensions between China and the U.S. escalated, negotiations to get China into the World Trade Organization failed, and it took some time for diplomacy to right itself. China joined the WTO in 2001.

The finance minister of Singapore at the time, Heng Swee Keat, took Bill Clinton’s secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, aside and offered a few words of wisdom. It was not in the best interest of the United States to adopt an adversarial stance with China. Heng had more significant pearls to offer Beijing: Tap western markets, western technology and western capital and develop your own economy.

March 24, 2008

Twenty years is not a long time, particularly not when dealing with China, which has always played a long game. But Beijing took Heng’s advice and we are watching that long game unfold. Over several decades now, China has made inroads in the West —in technology specifically — and dumped a lot of capital in the developing African countries.

China’s “Belt and Road Initiative,” launched in 2013, is yet another example of the country’s strategic goals: A trade infrastructure costing anywhere between $1 trillion and $8 trillion and involving 70 countries that will tie China to Europe and other Asian nations through a “belt” tying together China, Eurasia and Russia, and a maritime “road,” across several oceans and seas to the Suez Canal and up into Europe.

June 17, 2017

The plan is to end Chinese dependence on the United States. After decades of accumulating capital and technological knowledge, China is in a position to fundamentally alter the way global trade works.

Canada will, inevitably, be affected, especially if, as predicted, China expects the road part of its initiative to include an Arctic pass. This new Silk Road will not be the stuff of Marco Polo, which benefited the West immensely, but will be a huge boon to China and the allies it creates through the initiative.

All the more reason, then, that Canada must resolve its strained relationship with China sooner than later.

December 12, 2018

The present conflict stems from the arrest of Meng Wanzhou, a senior executive of Huawei, China’s big tech firm. She is wanted in the United States on fraud charges and, under a U.S.-Canadian extradition treaty, she is under house arrest here. China subsequently imprisoned two Canadian citizens and threatens to execute a third already in prison. How we got to this point matters less than how we get out of it.

International pressure, and a wider agreement involving the United States, could free the Canadians, get Meng out of Canada, and resolve this issue. That pressure can also see Canada, as a participant in dialogue with the 10 members of the ASEAN, using diplomacy within the organization to work with China on an amicable solution.

December 5, 2017

Canada must follow the advice of Singapore in 1999 and not adopt an adversarial stance with China, but at the same time it cannot be so naive as to think that an economic solution — like the U.S. imposition of tariffs — will work either.

China saw that move coming a long time ago and has been defending itself against it. Prosperity did not lead to a more politically liberal China. Ask the pro-democracy protesters right now in Hong Kong.

“A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step,” Lao-Tze wrote 2,500 years ago. Canada must be careful not to trip. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial) 

 

Saturday June 29, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday June 29, 2019

Time to remind the G20 there’s more to Canada’s economy than trade with China

China’s latest trade attack — this time on exports of Canadian meat — is a fresh warning of the current volatility in global commerce.

As the world’s largest trading nations gather at the G20 summit in Japan this week, there have been stern warnings that a failure to resolve the tariff dispute between the United States and China will have a dire effect on the entire global economy.

But despite repeated warnings of trade Armageddon, the North American economy has shown itself to be surprisingly resilient and the latest economic indicators tell us that Canada is actually doing quite well.

And as painful as it is for Canadian producers that have benefited from the Chinese market, the dark cloud of politically motivated trade action may have a silver lining.

For one thing, it tells Canadian exporters that China, willing to cast aside a long, close trading relationship in favour of  short-term political bullying, may not be a reliable trade partner.

For another, it is a reminder that, for Canada, exports to China are by no means the only game in town.

Certainly in the run-up to the G20 meeting in Osaka that officially begins Friday, spillover from the U.S.-China trade battle has been seen as a key subject of discussion. Whether there is any hope of a resolution is widely disputed.

“We were about 90 per cent of the way there and I think there’s a path to complete this,” said U.S. Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin this week, insisting he is optimistic talks between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping will lead to progress.

But there have been many other signals from the U.S. administration that there are large issues outstanding. Trump has warned of a “plan B” — including more tariffs — if China does not back down.

So far Xi has been equally intransigent, unwilling to give up key elements of his country’s long-term technology plan, the Made in China 2025 strategy, in exchange for short-term trade peace.

Between those two poles, Canada has been caught in the middle. U.S. hostility toward China, including its demand that Canada arrest Chinese Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou, has led directly to the Canada-China dispute. (CBC) 

 

Thursday May 16, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday May 16, 2019

Freeland renews push to remove steel, aluminum tariffs during Washington trip

July 27, 2018

Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland is bound for Washington to meet with Trump trade czar Robert Lighthizer in a renewed push to get punitive steel and aluminum tariffs lifted.

The meeting at the United States trade representative’s Washington office is to take place on Wednesday but Freeland will also venture to Capitol Hill for a meeting with the influential Republican chair of the Senate finance committee, Chuck Grassley.

“We continue to lobby very assertively for the lifting of the tariffs. We’re at a point where we need to do everything we can and talk to everyone we can about why we see these as unjust,” a senior government source said Tuesday, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the ongoing dispute.

June 1, 2018

The meetings come after a pair of telephone calls on consecutive days late last week between President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, in which the controversial 25-per-cent duty on Canadian steel and 10-per-cent levy on aluminum was a major subject of conversation.

On Tuesday, Grassley suggested to reporters in a conference call that an end to the tariffs might be close. Last month, Grassley tweeted that Trump must remove the tariffs before the new North American trade deal can be ratified.

Trump imposed them in the first place using a section of U.S. trade law that gives the president powers to put duties on imports on national-security grounds.

Freeland, Trudeau and others in Canadian government have derided the tariffs as absurd, illegal and insulting.

But Freeland has said she’s heartened by the recent comments of both Republican and Democratic American lawmakers who say the new North American trade agreement that includes Mexico can’t be ratified with the “Section 232” tariffs in place. (Global)