U.S., Canada reach new security deal

[adgal]

Published Friday, Sep. 09, 2011 7:50PM EDT
Last updated Sunday, Sep. 11, 2011 2:48PM EDT



The most crucial phase then lies ahead, as both the Canadian and U.S. governments try to sell the proposals to their respective publics. A new poll suggests that in Canada, at least, that could be harder than it would have been a few years ago, although with a majority government, the Conservatives can pass any legislation that may be required, barring massive public opposition.

The stakes are high on the initiative, which Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. President Barack Obama announced together in Washington last winter. Mr. Harper has told individuals in private meetings that he sees the Beyond the Border talks as the most ambitious advance in Canada-U.S. relations since the Free Trade Agreement of 1988.

Without an agreement, the non-tariff barriers that have increasingly obstructed the border since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks could remain in place and worsen.

The two governments are hoping that Mr. Harper and Mr. Obama will unveil the proposals themselves, although there are difficulties co-ordinating the leaders’ schedules.

Opponents have raised alarms that an agreement would cost Canadians both sovereignty and personal privacy. But failure to implement the agreements could further impair the world’s most extensive trading relationship, and put manufacturing jobs across the country at risk.

Details of the agreement are closely held. But goals outlined earlier include specific proposals to co-ordinate and align such things as biometrics on passports, watch lists, inspection of containers at overseas ports and other security measures.

The new agreement respects privacy laws in both countries, the sources said.

Both Americans and Canadians support the idea of closer co-operation on national security, a new poll conducted by Nanos Research and the State University of New York at Buffalo suggests, but their level of that support is declining.

When asked if they supported closer border security co-operation between the two countries, 64 per cent of Canadians and 71 per cent of Americans agreed. But six years ago, when memories of the Sept. 11 attacks were fresher, Canadian support was at 73 per cent and U.S. support at 81 per cent.

Getting Canadians to back the deal “is not necessarily a slam dunk, but there’s a lot of good will there,” Nik Nanos said in an interview. The positive attitude of most Canadians toward President Obama, he said, will help Mr. Harper.

The action plan is expected to propose making it easier to obtain temporary worker permits and documents such as the NEXUS card to circumvent Customs lineups. Factory shipments could be prescreened at the factory rather than at the border to ease passage.

The sources said much of what is proposed will not require legislation, although some if it will require budget outlays.

Canadians who believe that the United States has sold its liberty because of fears for its security, or who resist any further economic integration with the troubled economic giant, are likely to oppose the Beyond the Border proposals.

South of the border, protectionist forces in the United States might oppose granting Canada easier access to U.S. markets through a more porous border. However, with unemployment the No. 1 concern in the United States, increased economic and security co-operation could appeal to both Democrats and Republicans.

Some business leaders and others have said they seek the virtual elimination of any barriers to the flow of goods and people across the border. But nothing that ambitious is likely possible in either country.


    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/us-canada-reach-new-security-deal/article2160465/

[brice1967]

I totally understand the resistance.... it's a lot like what we have going on here.  People from both parties have been fear mongered and their beliefs look like a frog in a blender.  A lot of people, probably most of people cannot discern what is truthful information these days, and we have the media to thank for that.

Ever since the media became entertainment, we've been force fed opinions over facts.

[adgal]

I am waiting to see exactly what the bill says.  I have reservations for sure.  Like you said, it kind of looks good on paper, but we don't have all the details yet.  I can tell you, there is an awful lot of resistance to this here.  

[brice1967]

I don't know exactly what to think of this.  Personally, a lot of what's been happening since 9/11 seems good on paper, but later is found to be flawed or otherwise ineffective.  Call it racial profiling or whatever else you want to call it, but I think we spend too much of an effort checking people who do not fit the demographics of today's terrorists.  Besides Timothy Mc Vey and his cohorts, basically every act of terror has come out of a certain region.

I don't know how much things have been ramped up in Canada regarding security post 9/11, but we Americans have accepted what is happening with security as the new norm.  It is everywhere, it is routine.... part of it see's it as an invasion of privacy but the other side is almost content with the extra effort.  

Financially, not so sure that this would benefit either country any better than NAFTA.  

[adgal]

It sounds like this has positive implications for both countries economically as well as security wise.  However, I can understand the privacy issue...what do you all think?  This is all over our news here, and it sounds like the announcement will come at the end of the month.