Re: Moors comments on candidates... -- CON/COM/NET D&D

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

Subject: Re: Moors comments on candidates...

Author:
Michael Watkins

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 20:49:26 04/23/03 Wed
Author Host/IP: a3hu7fzy193i.bc.hsia.telus.net/207.6.230.61
In reply to: Greg Moors 's message, "Re: Moors comments on candidates..." on 00:23:29 04/17/03 Thu

Greg: With respect to NAFTA, chapter 11 is not the only problem and it�s certainly not an obsession. It is simply an easily demonstrated example. More concerning is the fact that US industry will be able to dictate our level of safety standards for medicine and consumer products.

I think many would argue that it is an obsession at worst, or at least a shrewd debating tactic that plays well to some crowds. I have listened to Mr. Orchard speak to a number of crowds. Very typically filled with student populations and what might be broadly termed as "anti-globalization" folks. I have watched Mr. Orchard beat his drum to the built-in anti-American rythyms of these groups. I have listened to his high level arguements that paint NAFTA in the worst possible light.

To those crowds, the obsession with Chapter 11 sells.

I have also seen Mr. Orchard sink, or slink, away from challenges brought forth at these same meetings. He's rather uncomfortable explaining his stern opposition to NAFTA when confronted with the termination provisions of the agreement. I have personally witnessed him moving the topic along lest the assembled crowd understand more fully that Canada may withdraw from the agreement by simple written notice.

Most rational people understand that relationships with other countries require agreements, and NAFTA, like any contractual agreement, has its flaws. Sane folks will also understand that no Progressive Conservative government would allow NAFTA to stand in its current form if indeed some situation develops where our national security and long term interests are threatend.

GM:Or how about the fact that when the next energy crisis comes Canadians will be on bicycles and stoking our wood stoves while we pump millions of gallons of crude and natural gas south due to proportional supply convents.

Firstly, termination of the agreement is always an available option. Secondly, in school they taught me that "proportional" means in this instance that we will be joined by our American friends on their bicycles. Proportional in the context of the agreement does not mean we will be unilaterally cut off from our energy supplies.

And again, the termination provision of NAFTA is always there for Canada should dire situations warrant its use.

Thirdly, as an active cyclist and environmentally aware citizen, I think having more people on bikes in North America would be a good thing.

;-)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject	Author	Date
Re: Moors comments on candidates...	J.C.	02:39:29 04/26/03 Sat
Re: Moors comments on candidates... -- Michael Watkins, 16:39:41 04/26/03 Sat