http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nafta-nowhere-near-close-1.4668556
James Smith
Rod Figueroa
Mike Johnson
The United States declared the NAFTA countries were nowhere close to a deal, in a statement Thursday designed to douse expectations that an agreement might be just a few minor adjustments away.
It rebuffed an effort from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland, and several high-ranking staffers who were in the U.S. on Thursday urging a quick deal.
U.S. trade czar Robert Lighthizer rejected the idea that an agreement was within imminent reach. He cited big differences on intellectual property, agriculture, online purchases, energy, labour, rules of origin and other issues.
"The NAFTA countries are nowhere near close to a deal.... There are gaping differences," Lighthizer said in an evening statement.
"We of course will continue to engage in negotiations, and I look forward to working with my counterparts to secure the best possible deal for American farmers, ranchers, workers, and businesses."
All three countries agreed that they would keep negotiating beyond Thursday, a date that had been presented as a procedural deadline for getting a deal to the U.S. Congress for a vote this year.
The reason Canada, Mexico and some in the U.S. want a deal wrapped up has to do with creating certainty, in terms of business confidence, and to settle the process before elections in Mexico and the U.S. stall progress until next year.
Some fear delay will add political unpredictability, since many of the politicians now involved will no longer be in politics next year: Mexico will have a new administration, the U.S. will have a new Congress after midterm elections, and several senior American lawmakers are retiring.
Trudeau had spent the day promoting the idea that an agreement was now within reach.
Trudeau received a call from U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday night in which they discussed the NAFTA negotiations, but a readout provided by the prime minister's office did not include any details.
Canada's case lay on a strand of seemingly linear logic. Canada's argument went that if the U.S. claims to be reopening NAFTA specifically to deal with its trade deficit, and if the leading cause of that trade deficit with Mexico involves autos, and if the autos issue is almost solved, then the Americans could walk away right now with a win.
"We are close to a deal," the prime minister said in New York. "We are down to a point where there is a good deal on the table."
Trudeau admitted to being unsure whether a deal would take days, weeks, or be put off indefinitely. In any case, he said he was ready to keep negotiating: "We'll keep working until they shut off the lights."
Trudeau drew another public contradiction Thursday — this one from Mexico.
The Mexican government scolded the prime minister over an element of the sales pitch he delivered in New York: Trudeau argued that the autos changes would help the U.S. by bringing back some Mexican jobs.
In the midst of a presidential election campaign in that country, and facing its own political pressures at home, the Mexican government publicly challenged Canada's prime minister.
"A clarification is necessary," Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo tweeted. "Any renegotiated NAFTA that implies losses of existing Mexican jobs is unacceptable."
Now it appears the U.S. is settling in for harder bargaining on issues like pharmaceuticals, dairy and online duty-free purchases. Lighthizer's statement did not mention a pair of other sticking points — dispute resolution and a so-called sunset clause.
In an appearance on the Fox Business Network, Trudeau had ridiculed the sunset clause idea, which would see NAFTA automatically end in five years unless all countries agree to extend it.
Trudeau used an example designed to appeal to a certain former real estate developer who is now the U.S. president; he compared the termination clause to building a skyscraper on a parcel of land you might lose in five years.
Lighthizer's statement also did not mention the threat of steel and aluminum tariffs — which are, at this point, scheduled to take effect June 1.
Those impending tariffs, the July 1 Mexican election and the U.S. congressional calendar had all created pressure for an imminent deal.
Top U.S. lawmaker Paul Ryan had declared Thursday as the last date for meeting the procedural deadlines for a vote this year. On Thursday, he revised that slightly.
Ryan clarified that if the independent body in the U.S. tasked with analyzing trade deals managed to assess the new NAFTA faster than legally required, in theory, an agreement could still get to the floor for a vote in this Congress.
Some in the Canadian government have mused about the potential strategic benefits of dragging out the talks. However that calculus has been tempered by Bank of Canada analysis that trade uncertainty is hurting the economy, reducing business investment by about two per cent and the overall gross domestic product by about 0.2 per cent this year.
That uncertainty has been compounded by the tariff threats.
'Nowhere near close:' U.S. rebuffs Trudeau hope for quick NAFTA deal
U.S. trade czar Robert Lighthizer cites 'gaping differences' after Trudeau says a 'good deal' is on the table
2610 Comments
James Smith
This government has no idea, no imagination and is wholly incompetent.
David Amos
@James Smith Methinks Canadians should ignore the political spin on NAFTA and simply Google the following words "Trump, Cohen, Amos, NAFTA and FATCA" and then ask their MP no matter what colour of coat they where why have my concerns been ignored by the current government N'esy Pas?
William Weston
@James Smith “This government has no idea, no imagination and is wholly incompetent”
And is always, always, always run by the same people fronted by the same two parties. Could there be a connection?
By electing representatives of our choosing in our ridings rather than party representatives of their choosing we could fix the problem standing in our way. It’s free (according to Elections Canada website), it’s progressive and it would mean our voice gets past the parties and into parliament.
It’s Canada; we are free to choose to be active and force democratic change or we can choose to sit back and complain about being victims. What a great country. For now.
And is always, always, always run by the same people fronted by the same two parties. Could there be a connection?
By electing representatives of our choosing in our ridings rather than party representatives of their choosing we could fix the problem standing in our way. It’s free (according to Elections Canada website), it’s progressive and it would mean our voice gets past the parties and into parliament.
It’s Canada; we are free to choose to be active and force democratic change or we can choose to sit back and complain about being victims. What a great country. For now.
David Amos
@William Weston "It’s Canada; we are free to choose to be active and force democratic change or we can choose to sit back and complain about being victims."
Methinks you should scroll up through this thread and read my comment in order to check out my tip then decide on what side of the fence you are on N'esy Pas?
Methinks you should scroll up through this thread and read my comment in order to check out my tip then decide on what side of the fence you are on N'esy Pas?
Bill Nazarene
@David Amos
Such misplaced self-importance. But, hey... you be you.
Sad...
Such misplaced self-importance. But, hey... you be you.
Sad...
William Weston
@David Amos
I would but my doctor of letters has me on a strict diet and I'm only eight syllables short of my daily allowance.
I would but my doctor of letters has me on a strict diet and I'm only eight syllables short of my daily allowance.
David Amos
@William Weston Methinks that you and Mr Nazarene get the governments you deserve in light of the fact that you would rather make fun of me instead of simply Googling the following words "Trump, Cohen, Amos, NAFTA and FATCA" N'esy Pas?
David Amos
@Bill Nazarene Methinks you may enjoy Googling the following N'esy Pas?
William Weston Bill Nazarene David Amos CBC
William Weston Bill Nazarene David Amos CBC
William Weston
@David Amos "Methinks that you..."
My apologies, I was wrong for making what I intended as a light hearted comment and you saw as a slight.
My apologies, I was wrong for making what I intended as a light hearted comment and you saw as a slight.
David Amos
@William Weston I thank you for that. It speaks well of your sense of integrity. In return I will bury the hatchet with you. Everybody knows I have enough enemies. Just Google my name and you will understand.
Rod Figueroa
Trudeau delivers Zero. Freeland, Zero.
Bill Nazarene
@Rod Figueroa
Canada's position is clear. All parties are all in or not in at all. Trump's insistence on an 'escape clause' is just another version of an old theme of his: "Please, baby. Just the tip."
No thanks to this punk.
Canada's position is clear. All parties are all in or not in at all. Trump's insistence on an 'escape clause' is just another version of an old theme of his: "Please, baby. Just the tip."
No thanks to this punk.
David Amos
@Bill Nazarene "Such misplaced self-importance. But, hey... you be you."
Methinks the same should be said of you N'esy Pas?
Methinks the same should be said of you N'esy Pas?
Mike Johnson
Jason Kenney summed it up pretty good.
David Amos
@Corey Arseneault "Jason Kenny is a populist like trump. He will tell you whatever it takes to get elected. He is a perfect example of someone that shouldn't be in politics. I think he would be great as a political commenter"
Methinks I wholeheartedly agree with your first thought but I don't think he would be great as a "political commenter" Hence I must sit on the fence about your comment N'esy Pas?
Methinks I wholeheartedly agree with your first thought but I don't think he would be great as a "political commenter" Hence I must sit on the fence about your comment N'esy Pas?
Randolph F Whelan
How embarrassing. First getting called out by Mexico and next day, bam, getting called out by the US. Have another puff JT
David Amos
@Randolph F Whelan "How embarrassing."
Methinks Trudeau The Younger does not know how to feel embarrassed. His trip to India proved that N'esy Pas?
Methinks Trudeau The Younger does not know how to feel embarrassed. His trip to India proved that N'esy Pas?
Randolph F Whelan
@David Amos
oui
oui
Daryl McBride
This man is just not ready, period.
Karen King
@Daryl McBride
Right but you think wee Andy is??
Right but you think wee Andy is??
David Amos
@Karen King "Right but you think wee Andy is??"
Methinks Harper 2.0 is a perfect clown for this three ring Circus overseen by narcissistic dudes who cannot be called "Three Amigos" N'esy Pas?
Methinks Harper 2.0 is a perfect clown for this three ring Circus overseen by narcissistic dudes who cannot be called "Three Amigos" N'esy Pas?
Douglas Fowler
This difference just demonstrates that Trudeau just spins for his 35% base. The Agreement is nowhere near completion and he says "a good deal is on the table". Be afraid, very afraid!
David Amos
@Douglas Fowler "Be afraid, very afraid!"
Methinks I am far too old to learn how to be afraid So I will just sit back and watch the circus unfold its tent. Then like one the heroes of my youth Yosemite Sam I will pay my two bits to watch the High Diving Acts of Mr Trump and Trudeau The Younger just like any Proud Canadian should N'esy Pas?
Methinks I am far too old to learn how to be afraid So I will just sit back and watch the circus unfold its tent. Then like one the heroes of my youth Yosemite Sam I will pay my two bits to watch the High Diving Acts of Mr Trump and Trudeau The Younger just like any Proud Canadian should N'esy Pas?
Glenn Carruthers
This is way too complex for a drama teacher.
David Amos
@Glenn Carruthers Methinks drama is all politics is
Trump the old dude with strange hair and Trudeau The Younger the young dude with great hair proved it byway of getting elected against all odds N'esy Pas?
Trump the old dude with strange hair and Trudeau The Younger the young dude with great hair proved it byway of getting elected against all odds N'esy Pas?
Elias Snodgrass
So we are (pick one)
a) Close to a deal
b) Not close to a deal
or even
c) No one really knows
a) Close to a deal
b) Not close to a deal
or even
c) No one really knows
David Amos
@Elias Snodgrass I will go with c)
Dirk Beauregard
Lighthizer....transparent.
Trudeau....not so much.
Trudeau....not so much.
John Gerrits
@Dirk Beauregard Oh,he's very transparent....Canadians and the world are truly beginning to see right through the incompetence.
David Amos
@John Gerrits I agree
Dougal Fingal
Trudeau, true to form, is full of baloney.
Colin Seeley
@Dougal Fingal
Stupid is -as - stupid does.
Stupid is -as - stupid does.
David Amos
@Colin Seeley Forest Gump and I both agree
David Amos
@Stan Nova Methinks Canadian baloney costs too much these days but I bet a lot of old folks enjoy the Canadian version of Yankee Spam called Kam like I do N'esy Pas?
'Nowhere near close:' U.S. rebuffs Trudeau hope for quick NAFTA deal
U.S. trade czar Robert Lighthizer cites 'gaping differences' after Trudeau says a 'good deal' is on the table
The United States declared the NAFTA countries were nowhere close to a deal, in a statement Thursday designed to douse expectations that an agreement might be just a few minor adjustments away.
It rebuffed an effort from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland, and several high-ranking staffers who were in the U.S. on Thursday urging a quick deal.
U.S. trade czar Robert Lighthizer rejected the idea that an agreement was within imminent reach. He cited big differences on intellectual property, agriculture, online purchases, energy, labour, rules of origin and other issues.
"The NAFTA countries are nowhere near close to a deal.... There are gaping differences," Lighthizer said in an evening statement.
"We of course will continue to engage in negotiations, and I look forward to working with my counterparts to secure the best possible deal for American farmers, ranchers, workers, and businesses."
All three countries agreed that they would keep negotiating beyond Thursday, a date that had been presented as a procedural deadline for getting a deal to the U.S. Congress for a vote this year.
The reason Canada, Mexico and some in the U.S. want a deal wrapped up has to do with creating certainty, in terms of business confidence, and to settle the process before elections in Mexico and the U.S. stall progress until next year.
Trudeau had spent the day promoting the idea that an agreement was now within reach.
Trudeau says 'we're close to a deal'
Trudeau received a call from U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday night in which they discussed the NAFTA negotiations, but a readout provided by the prime minister's office did not include any details.
Canada's case lay on a strand of seemingly linear logic. Canada's argument went that if the U.S. claims to be reopening NAFTA specifically to deal with its trade deficit, and if the leading cause of that trade deficit with Mexico involves autos, and if the autos issue is almost solved, then the Americans could walk away right now with a win.
"We are close to a deal," the prime minister said in New York. "We are down to a point where there is a good deal on the table."
Trudeau admitted to being unsure whether a deal would take days, weeks, or be put off indefinitely. In any case, he said he was ready to keep negotiating: "We'll keep working until they shut off the lights."
Trudeau drew another public contradiction Thursday — this one from Mexico.
The Mexican government scolded the prime minister over an element of the sales pitch he delivered in New York: Trudeau argued that the autos changes would help the U.S. by bringing back some Mexican jobs.
In the midst of a presidential election campaign in that country, and facing its own political pressures at home, the Mexican government publicly challenged Canada's prime minister.
"A clarification is necessary," Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo tweeted. "Any renegotiated NAFTA that implies losses of existing Mexican jobs is unacceptable."
The National
Deal or no deal on NAFTA: Canada and U.S. send mixed messages
00:0003:02
In an appearance on the Fox Business Network, Trudeau had ridiculed the sunset clause idea, which would see NAFTA automatically end in five years unless all countries agree to extend it.
Trudeau used an example designed to appeal to a certain former real estate developer who is now the U.S. president; he compared the termination clause to building a skyscraper on a parcel of land you might lose in five years.
Lighthizer's statement also did not mention the threat of steel and aluminum tariffs — which are, at this point, scheduled to take effect June 1.
Those impending tariffs, the July 1 Mexican election and the U.S. congressional calendar had all created pressure for an imminent deal.
Top U.S. lawmaker Paul Ryan had declared Thursday as the last date for meeting the procedural deadlines for a vote this year. On Thursday, he revised that slightly.
Ryan clarified that if the independent body in the U.S. tasked with analyzing trade deals managed to assess the new NAFTA faster than legally required, in theory, an agreement could still get to the floor for a vote in this Congress.
Some in the Canadian government have mused about the potential strategic benefits of dragging out the talks. However that calculus has been tempered by Bank of Canada analysis that trade uncertainty is hurting the economy, reducing business investment by about two per cent and the overall gross domestic product by about 0.2 per cent this year.
That uncertainty has been compounded by the tariff threats.