FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Dec 15

Canada and the U.S. Trade Fall-Out From U.K.’s Brexit

by bcurry

Both Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and President Donald Trump issued statements congratulating Boris Johnson on his recent overwhelming electoral victory, pledging to co-operate on “issues that matter to both of our countries”.  One of these issues will be that of trade between our countries and the U.K. when it leaves the European Union (EU) with the implementation of Brexit. Although the U.K. now looks set to leave the EU on Jan.31, 2020, an “implementation period” will maintain its existing trade agreements through to Dec. 31, 2020. Currently, Canada’s trade with the U.K. is covered under the terms of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) negotiated by Canada with the E.U. Donald Trump’s United States doesn’t currently have a trade agreement with Europe. Of course, Boris Johnson would love to enter into a free trade agreement with the U.S.  Good luck on that one.

The UK is by far Canada’s most important commercial partner in Europe and our fifth largest trading partner globally. According to Global Affairs Canada, two way merchandise trade in 2018, reached over $25 billion. However, Canada is not expected to make any moves on trade with the U.K. until it sees what happens with the outcome of U.K. trade negotiations with the EU. As it now stands, British trade policy is perceived as being in a mess, especially in the financial services and agricultural sectors. Depending on how things go with Brussels, the powerful U.K. banking industry may want more access to Canada’s market.  It’s very unlikely that Canada is going to be willing to give them something in that area. The Canadian banking and financial services sector is quite highly regulated and restrictive.

As for the U.S., next to the EU, the U.S is the top trading partner with 13.3% of total UK exports going to the U.S. in 2019, totalling about $64 billion (U.S.). It’s much more important for the UK to have access to American markets than it is for the U.S. to have increased access to UK markets. Trump has already made it clear that Boris Johnson wants to do business with the U.S. “so badly” — but at what costs? For example, concerns have been raised that parts of the Britain’s publicly-funded National Health Service (NHS) could be made available to U.S. markets by a Conservative government.

Whatever the case, as a result of the new Conservative government’s desire to move quickly on Brexit, 2020 will bring about some interesting and often troubling trade and domestic issues for the U.K. It is certain that Britain’s leaving the EU will lead to renewed independence initiatives in Scotland and the question of the potential union of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, both regions which strongly preferred to remain as part of the EU. Whether Brexit will lead to better economic conditions in the U.K. will be a determining political factor for the new government. Meanwhile, Canada and the U.S. can only sit back and observe the outcome before making any further trade-related moves. Many North American businesses which have U.K. subsidiaries are sitting on their hands and postponing any planned investments. Unfortunately, the British people are the ones who have to deal with the economic vulnerabilities and political uncertainties resulting from Brexit.

Canada Donald Trump Protectionist Trade Policies Trade with EU US

Leave a comment »
Dec 9

Accusing Canada of Not Living Up to Its NATO Commitments is Overkill

by bcurry

Canada has roughly the same population (approx. 36 million people) as the state of California. Despite this, Canada has a long and proud military history — having significantly contributed citizens and materials to two World Wars and more recently to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) involvement in Afghanistan and Latvia. With a relatively small number of regular military personnel who are well armed and trained, Canada has contributed to numerous peace time operations of both NATO and the United Nations.

At a NATO summit in Wales in 2014, NATO nations for some arbitrary reason agreed to the target measurement of 2 per cent of a country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for its total defence spending. Canada currently spends about 1.31 per cent of GDP on defence. However, tabulate the defence dollars actually being spent on the military and Canada ranks an impressive sixth among the 29 NATO nations. A number of expert observers have agreed that NATO’s defence budget formula is very flawed, and allows small obscure countries like Bulgaria and Estonia to declare that they are more than meeting the 2 per cent target. In such cases, the purchase of a new ship or aircraft and one can easily surpass this GDP target. However, these and other similar countries contribute little in actual on-the-ground NATO support or suffer casualties as Canada did in Afghanistan.

So along comes Donald Trump who threatened to pull the U.S. out of NATO if all its members didn’t meet the 2 per cent of GDP target. The U.S., as a so-called super power and having its own foreign policy objectives backed up by an immense military-industrial establishment, now spends 3.42 per cent of its GDP on defence. Little surprise there, especially given vast American operations in the Middle East, South-East Asian seas and Afghanistan. For Trump to say that NATO is “obsolete” and frequently compliment Russian President Vladimir Putin are both absurd and even dangerous. After Russia’s “illegal annexation” of Crimea, NATO spoke of its solidarity with the Ukraine. Someone has to stand up to Russian aggression — if not NATO then who?

As part of its commitment to national security and to NATO, Canada is due to embark on major expenditures on fighter jets and the navy. Whether or not Canada meets some arbitrary target in defence spending is not all that critical. What is, is the country’s need to maintain a professional, prepared and well trained military.  I fully believe that the brave and competent men and women of Canada’s armed forces will continue to uphold the country’s proud military heritage. Something that the likes of Donald Trump cannot and will not fully appreciate.

Canada Donald Trump Foreign Policy Military Prowess NATO Ukraine US

Leave a comment »
Dec 2

Canada and U.S. Need to Consult More on How to Manage Artic Waters

by bcurry

Increasingly, the Artic waterways are open for a longer period to limited shipping, including commercial vessels, due to the impact of climate change in warming the oceans’ waters. For years, the former Soviet Union and now Russia have been building a greater capacity to travel through the Northwest Passage, even when the ice is still fairly thick. North of Russia shipping from Europe to Asia now takes place on an intermittent basis. Russia is far ahead of both Canada and the U.S. in creating ice-breaking capacity and particularly in the building of large nuclear-powered icebreakers. Currently the U.S. has two heavy icebreakers that are in their last days of service, and no new replacements are under construction at this time. Under a previous Conservative government, Canada proposed building a heavy polar icebreaker, but almost no progress has been made toward its actual construction.

Besides the potential natural resources that the Artic has, the Artic waters are of an important strategic value, militarily and politically, to both Canada and the U.S.  This year Canada released a comprehensive Arctic policy framework that places the emphasis for future development on civilian development. However, Canadian policy does not address Arctic shipping concerns.  This certainly is not a way to reinforce Canadian sovereignty off our Arctic coast.  Alaska’s two senators, Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, recently proposed the creation of an Arctic Shipping Federal Advisory Committee to centralize discussions about shipping in Alaskan waters.

I would go one step further and suggest that a joint North American body needs to be created, just as we have one for common defense concerns in the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and the International Joint Commission (IJC) to deal with mutual issues involving the Great Lakes waterways, commercial shipping and environmental concerns. Not only do we need to monitor Russian activities in Artic waters, but both countries can better coordinate investments in the creation of an ‘Artic seaway’ and the development of Artic ports.

At this time, neither Canada nor the United States has much to offer in the event of a maritime disaster in North American Arctic waters. Isn’t it about time that both countries get together to share resources and expertise to counter the growing Russian influence in Artic waters.  Instead of investing in military capabilities in outer space, it might be wiser to invest more resources right here on earth where more immediate and important needs must be addressed.

Canada Cimate Change Climate Change Foreign Policy Foreign Policy Military Prowess US

Leave a comment »
Nov 9

Do Current Democratic Presidential Candidates Have Billionaires On The Run?

by bcurry

Well, now we have one Michael Bloomberg interested in perhaps running in the Democratic primaries. For those unaware, Mr. Bloomberg is a 77-year-old former New York City mayor and billionaire businessman who has been outspoken in his criticism of President Trump, even prior to the last election. Bloomberg’s entering the race would make him the richest person to ever run for president, beating out billionaire Ross Perot who ran as a third party candidate in the 1990s.  Bloomberg is considered to be a centrist policy-wise.  One of the main reasons he is considering running is his stated belief that he doesn’t think that former Vice-President Joe Biden or Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders could beat Donald Trump.

I have another theory. Bloomberg may not like the left-leaning Democratic candidates Senators Warren and Sanders, who are among the top performers in early primary polling. One of Warren’s signature policy proposals is a wealth tax that would require the rich to pay 2 cents for every dollar over $50 million in their personal fortunes. Sanders, a self-declared democratic socialist, has also proposed a version of a wealth tax and is famous for railing against “millionaires and billionaires” in his campaign speeches.  Now this has made a number of multi-millionaires nervous, including Bill Gates, Tom Steyer and John Delaney to name a few.

Although it may be that the Democratic Party believes it is the party of working people and people of colour, there is always the danger of its policies being taken over by the super rich. Allowing an ultra-wealthy centrist to dominate its platform would be an unhealthy turn of events.  Indeed, one could argue that the 2020 Democratic primary is a referendum on billionaire control of the Democratic Party.  I strongly believe that working-class Americans would prefer to see a clear delineation between the corporate stooges in the Republican Party led by Donald Trump and the more progressive policies supported by the likes of Biden, Sanders or Warren.

Make no doubt, the Democratic Party has its supporters among the .1 percenters. No political party in the U.S., as in Canada, can ignore the influence of the super wealthy. However, it is a perilous move to allow a billionaire or multi-billionaire take control of its platform.  After all, it was many of these same people who got us into the worst recession since the great depression, from which many ordinary Americans and Canadians are still recovering.  In any democracy, one needs some clear choices.  With Mr. Bloomberg’s candidacy, we would only be muddying the political waters.

Presidential Election 2020 US

Leave a comment »
Nov 1

November Is Here, Leaves Are Falling And So Is The President

by bcurry

There’s a cold wind blowing here, but not as cold as the one in Washington, D.C.  Congress has voted to proceed with the impeachment hearings over the President’s dealings with the Ukraine and consequential national security concerns. Just to remind us, the Ukraine has been fighting against attacks in eastern Ukraine by Russian-backed forces after Russia took over Crimea. As a result, NATO allies, including Canada and the U.S., agreed to supply the Ukraine with military aid and training. Apparently, President Trump delayed the transfer of American aid to the Ukraine on the condition that the Ukrainian administration investigated business dealings by Joe Biden and his son. Such activities would have occurred during Biden’s stint as vice president of the United States from 2009 to 2017. This request was made despite the fact that the current Ukrainian administration had earlier investigated matters related to state corruption and found no evidence of any direct link to the Biden’s.

Although the President has denied that there was no “quid pro quo” arrangement with the Ukraine concerning the matter, closed-door testimony by white house officials before the congressional committee appears to contradict the President. Hopefully, the upcoming public hearings will help clear the air as to what actually took place.  The American public needs to know the truth one way or another.

Yet, here’s the clincher. With Trump, his intervention in Ukraine appears to have been an abuse of his powers, but, conceivably, not a crime. The debate about the criminality of the President’s behaviour with regard to Ukraine, on some level, will always remain a theoretical matter.  Trump’s lawyers will argue that such dealings between heads of states are just a normal part of foreign policy initiatives. Nevertheless, Trump proceeded to use his position as President to have a foreign government look into what is obviously a matter of politics in light of the upcoming presidential election.  Does such a move represent an abuse of presidential power and a real threat to American national security?  That will be up to Congress to shortly decide and American voters to eventually judge at the polls.

Whatever comes out of the impeachment hearings, there is little doubt that Trump and his administration and the Republican Party are on the defensive. Congress has a right to defend the constitution and no president is above the law.  The rest of the world is closely watching and is deeply concerned about the subsequent consequences and greater instabilities.  Things most likely will get nastier and partisan divisions will grow even wider in American governance.  God help the United States of America!

Impeachment Proceedings US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Oct 8

Trump’s Foreign Policy Is A Complete And Utter Flop

by bcurry

Just hours after President Trump declared that American troops were being withdrawn from the Syrian border, he warned Turkey that he would “totally destroy and obliterate” the economy of Turkey if he’s unhappy with how the country carries out its planned assault on Kurdish fighters. Indeed, what Trump has done is a betrayal and abandonment of the Kurds who, with U.S. backing, have been fearlessly fighting the Islamist radicals of ISIS in northern Syria. Both Democrats and Republicans have condemned the move as irresponsible and dangerous, leaving the Kurds to worry about a war with the more powerful Turkey and an inability to deal with the thousands of ISIS members interned in Syria. Some have even suggested that ISIS may re-emerge under the circumstances.

This is just another example of Trump’s lack of good judgement and his inability to appreciate the consequences of his foreign policies to date. Take North Korea for example, we now have a situation where nothing has happened since the talks between President Donald Trump and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un broke down. Indeed, the meetings only helped to legitimatize Kim’s regime on the world stage, while allowing him to continue testing missiles capable of reaching most Asian countries.  There are also suspected hidden nuclear fuel production sites around the country.

With respect to the European Union (EU), Brexit and the Ukraine, Trump has interfered on a number of occasions, upsetting his NATO and European allies. He has instead aligned himself with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and dropped out of nuclear missile treaty with Russia, which is what Russia wanted all along. Trump is far too close to Putin, particularly in light of the Russian invasion of Crimea and confirmed Russian hacking in the 2016 election.

In terms of the current disastrous Brexit negotiations between Britain and the EU, Trump is much too close to Prime Minister Boris Johnson who in an undemocratic manner tried to circumvent the British Parliament to get his way. Then there are the recent revelations about Trump’s unprecedented dealings with the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky which have led to the launch of an impeachment enquiry in the House of Representatives.  Here we have the President trying to persuade the Ukrainian President to get involved in a political-inspired investigation of an American presidential candidate.  Trump’s request has been tied to the withholding of military aid to Ukraine, something everyone agrees is not normal and most likely illegal. He has even suggested that China should undertake a similar investigation. Go figure!

On top of all this, one has the U.S. State Department in total turmoil. Its officials have little input into the Trump Administration’s foreign policy decisions and are daily loosing credibility abroad and in the U.S.  Once a highly respected and influential arm of government, one now has a Secretary of State who has become nothing more than a puppet for the President.  Mike Pompeo simply defends his boss’s mistakes, regardless of the international consequences.  One can only imagine what goes on in the National Security Council on a daily basis?

Donald Trump Foreign Policy Iraq and ISIS North Korea US

Leave a comment »
Oct 5

Can We Believe Canadian Political Parties on Promises to Deal with Climate Change?

by bcurry

During the current federal election in Canada, four of the major parties are each suggesting that they have the answer when it comes to dealing with the issue of climate change. Years ago, Canada under a Conservative government signed onto the Paris Climate Accord. An assertion was made that Canada would reach certain reductions in carbon emissions by 2020. Recent studies have shown that this won’t happen.  The current Liberal government did introduce a tax on fossil fuel usage and greenhouse emissions, but is facing several court battles spearheaded by several Conservative provincial governments.  While Canadians in polls tend to support tackling climate change as an important issue, they appear to not be willing to pay much in support of policies directed at the issue.  Especially where jobs are involved.

The recent demonstrations held across Canada and the world highlighted the concerns of future generations about the impact of climate change and the abysmal efforts of countries to seriously address the issue. One could not help but admire the anger of today’s youth over the lack of real progress in reducing carbon emissions globally and our continuing reliance on fossil fuels.  Indeed, in Canada, it didn’t help that the federal government bought an oil and gas pipeline in the hope of completing its construction down the road. It is hoped that oil from the Alberta oil fields would be transported via the pipeline to the coast of British Columbia in order to be shipped to overseas markets. Somewhat hypocritical, yes!  Then you have the federal Green Party and New Democratic Party stating that they would cancel all pipeline construction, instead preferring to invest in green and alternative technologies.  Somewhat unrealistic, yes!  The Conservative Party’s environment platform is pretty much straight forward: kill the federal carbon tax.  However, its leader has little to offer in the Party’s proposed policies, given few details, timelines and costing.  Some Conservatives, like the Republicans in the U.S., still believe that climate change is a hoax.

All in all, the major federal parties are nowhere near meeting the foreseen needs associated with effectively tackling issues surrounding climate change. The Green Party which represents the main party with a holistic environmental agenda has little chance of ever forming the government.  However, should the October election result in a minority government, the Green Party could become a major player in supporting either the Liberals or Conservatives in forming the government.  Should this happen, then Canada may just have a national government willing to deal with the urgent issues concerning climate change and carbon emissions. Perhaps, this is what Canada needs at this crucial juncture in human history.

 

Canada Cimate Change Climate Change Oil and Gas Transport of Oil US

Leave a comment »
Sep 25

Governments and Employers Have to Deal With the Implications of an Aging Population

by bcurry

According to Statistics Canada’s most recent population projections, by 2015 there would be more people in Canada over the age of 65 than under the age of 15. The number of seniors is expected to double over the next 25 years.  According to American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), today there are about 44 million adults in the United States who provide unpaid care for a loved one who needs support. The numbers of seniors are increasing every day in each country.  People are also living longer due to advances in medical and health sciences.  This has serious implications for society in light of issues surrounding elder care, an aging workforce, old age income security, long-term care, the increase in persons with health issues such as dementia and Parkinson’s, the impact on health care systems, etc., etc.

A 2017 survey by the U.S. National Business Group on Health, a coalition of large employers, found that 88 percent of employers think care giving will be a big issue over the next few years.  Surprisingly, it has been determined that the average age of care givers is 33 years old.  Many of whom are members of the so-called “sandwich generation”, whereby they have both children and elderly relatives to look after.  Many care givers are experiencing stress as a result of the dual responsibilities. In addition, we are already experiencing serious shortages in long-term care facilities for those seniors who have major health issues.

Many of the millions of baby boomers have turned 65 and their parents are living past 85, joining the fastest-growing segment of the population. The boomers who have retired must now not only look after their own costs of living and their own income security, but also have responsibilities for helping out their aging parents.  As the baby boomers themselves age, their children may also have to help them to cope with continuing to normally function in today’s society.  For those care givers still in the labour force, there are few companies that subsidize elder care benefits, have written policies about elder care or provide for paid elder care leave.

The lack of existing elder care policies in the private sector leaves governments with the responsibility to initiate new approaches to tackling the issues surrounding an aging population, as they did with child care in the past. Canada is in the midst of a federal election. It’s time that all political parties propose how they plan to deal with aging population issues, including old age income security, long-term health and home care, tax breaks for elder caregivers, labour standards directed at those providing elder care, universal drug and dental benefits, etc., etc.  Seniors represent about a quarter of all voting citizens, thus representing a major voting group which political parties cannot continue to ignore. They need to influence employers and future governments.

Canada Federal Election Health Care US

Leave a comment »
Sep 13

Why Is The Trump Administration Attacking Environmental Protection?

by bcurry

A recent article in the New York Times (September 12, 2019) noted that up until June of the year, 85 environmental rules had been rolled back under the Trump administration. Several rules, a number of which had been implemented under the Obama administration, were aimed at preventing pollution in air and water.  In addition, some were aimed at protecting endangered species and ensuring safer drilling and extraction related to the oil and gas industry.  A simple answer is that the rollbacks are aimed to please farmers, rural landowners, developers and the coal, oil and gas industry which make up a good portion of Trump’s support.

The most recent rollback by the Trump administration is the repeal of a major Obama-era clean water regulation, known as the Waters of the United States rule, that had placed limits on polluting chemicals that could be used near streams, wetlands and other bodies of water.  This rule was designed to limit pollution in about 60 percent of the nation’s bodies of water, protecting sources of drinking water for about one-third of the United States.  We all know about the repercussions from unsafe drinking water — just think of Flint, Michigan.

For years, one admired the work of the once highly-respected U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) which often led the way in environmental protection measures that Canadian environmental agencies similarly adopted. Think of the bilateral work between Canada and the U.S. in areas such as dealing with “acid rain” and the clean up of the Great Lakes.  It’s a shame that under Trump the EPA is moving backwards in terms of protecting the environment and endangered species and away from its original mandate.  To reverse these measures may take years to accomplish and the country will see serious environmental repercussions.

In terms of dealing with carbon emission reductions — think climate change — the Trump administration has taken a “laissez fare” approach, and even aggressively attacks states such as California who are trying to do something about their carbon emissions. This includes Trump’s warning to the state that a recent emissions deal with several automakers may be illegal.  A letter from the EPA and the Department of Transportation is the latest sign of President Trump’s anger at California and car manufacturers that have bucked his plans to roll back regulations put in place to combat climate change. Inevitably, the matter may end up being decided by the courts — again prompting more delays and serious drawbacks in tackling air pollution and climate change issues.

Canada Cimate Change Climate Change Donald Trump US

Leave a comment »
Sep 8

How Many More Mega-Storms Will It Take?

by bcurry

As I sit here, Hurricane Dorian has just hit the Canadian Maritimes (Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick) with 160 km/hr winds, downing hydro poles and trees and removing roofs and flooding homes and businesses. After devastating the Bahamas as a Category 5 hurricane, Dorian continued up the U.S. eastern seaboard leaving further destruction along its path.

Scientists continue to warn us of an increase in particularly violent storms due to the impact of climate change on the oceans and across continents. Can we do something about its impact besides shoring up infrastructure, changing agricultural patterns, reducing carbon emissions, implementing more emergency planning and resources, relocating populations further inland or to safer locations, introducing new technologies, etc., etc.?  These are simply stop-gap measures.

Given the lack of global will of governments to seriously tackle the underlying causes contributing to man-made climate change, perhaps this is all one can do! A recent study, by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, shows that about 70 percent of Americans believe that the climate is changing, most acknowledge that this change reflects human activity, and more than two-thirds think it will harm future generations.  Yet the same study found that most Americans would support energy-conserving policies only if they cost households less than $200 per year — woefully short of the investment required to keep warming under catastrophic rates.  If an identical study involving Canadians were undertaken, it would probably indicate similar results.

Merely paying lip service to and recognizing the impact of climate change is no longer any good. Societies and nations have to act and act now in real and tangible ways.  Setting targets for carbon reduction is no longer enough if no real resources are applied and major societal changes take place.  Industrialized countries like Canada and the U.S. must help to lead the way.  The environment demands it, we all must demand it.  The impact of environmental issues will affect all economies.  Sustainable plans must immediately be put in place in order to ensure our economic future and that of the planet.  People must be convinced in order to recognize and support the necessary measures to effectively deal with this reality.  Moreover, we have to walk the talk.

Canada Cimate Change Climate Change US

Leave a comment »
«Older Entries
Newer Entries »
Blog at WordPress.com.