Sunday, May 27, 2007

Stop the NAU

The stakes are too high. I've said in the past and I'll say it again: I have no affection whatsoever for Maude Barlow or Lou Dobbs, but they're absolutely correct on this one: The North American Union must be stopped.

It's one thing to streamline trade for law-abiding companies and in that sense I do support such projects as Continental 1 and the completion of I-69. I also am in agreement with the idea of compulsory e-manifests for truckers, which has been applied to a number of key border crossings for some time and was implemented along the Niagara River last week. Process the paperwork before the rig gets to the border, one saves time and ensures "just in time" remains just that.

It's quite another thing, however, to have a European style arrangment with one country calling all the shots -- or rather, big business calling all the shots. Without labour and environmental standards, common and very tough safety regulations, and general principles of quality control (all of which the EU has); and without expanding such a union to incorporate all of the Americas, including Cuba, there's simply no point.

The idea is to raise standards and not lower them. Negotiating a treaty without even ratifying it is grossly unconstitutional in all would-be member countries anyway, and being in dereliction of duty the leaders of the three countries (Canada, the US and Mexico) ought to resign or put the idea to a binding referendum with a negative vote in any of the three nullifying the deal all together.

In the future, I'd like to see the Americas become borderless, in the sense that the borders are just lines on the map and that there is genuine sovereignty-association as the EU. But we're looking at another 20 years before that will be realistic. Plus, we have that pesky "War on Terrorism" we have to win. So for now, no NAU.

Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.

No comments: