Thread: More Mexican labour needed in oil patch, executives say

More Mexican labour needed in oil patch, executives say
North American CEO group recommends Canada import temporary workers
STEVEN CHASE

From Friday's Globe and Mail

OTTAWA — Canada and Mexico should accelerate efforts to import temporary Mexican energy workers to alleviate the skills shortage in Alberta and other provinces as oil sands development ramps up, top North American CEOs will recommend today.

They will also call for Canada, the United States and Mexico to start work on harmonizing regulations and standards in three sectors: financial services, transportation, and food and agriculture, The Globe and Mail has learned.

The 30 chief executive officers make up the North American Competitiveness Council, formed last year to advise political leaders on strengthening economic ties between Canada, the United States and Mexico.

They're tabling a 63-page report with 51 recommendations today as top politicians from all three countries meet in Ottawa to advance a continental security and prosperity partnership first struck in 2005. They include U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, Mexican Secretary of Foreign Affairs Patricia Espinosa, Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay and Industry Minister Maxime Bernier.

CEOs will argue that Mexico stands to benefit in the long run from training people to help develop its own energy sector.

Members of the council include Dominic D'Alessandro of Manulife Financial, Paul Desmarais Jr. of Power Corp. of Canada and Michael Sabia of BCE Inc.

The group counts seven other Canadian CEOs as members, as well as 10 American and 10 Mexican chief executives.

They're recommending both short-term goals for 2008 and longer-term targets for 2010.

Thomas d'Aquino, head of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, wouldn't discuss the contents of the report but lauded the fact that it managed to find a corporate consensus among three countries in less than one year.

"I would say that in a relatively small amount of time to pull together Mexican, American and Canadian positions on subjects as complex as . . . [these] is a definite sign of progress," Mr. d'Aquino said.

The 2005 security and prosperity deal was aimed at defending North America against terrorism or natural disasters and helping it better fend off economic threats from China and India. It committed Canada, the United States and Mexico to co-operate closely in three separate areas: security, economic and regulatory standards.

The report tackles three concerns for North American businesses: border crossings, energy supplies and the lack of harmony in regulations and standards between Canada, Mexico and the United States.

The lion's share of recommendations -- 23 -- are aimed at smoothing border crossings, including upgrading bridges, tunnels and border approaches that help ferry goods between the three countries.

They call for a reduction in redundant inspections, given that, for instance, vehicles and associated parts cross the Canada-U.S. border roughly seven times in the process of auto manufacturing.

Another 18 recommendations lay out proposals for regulatory co-operation and 10 call for work on integrating North American energy supplies and distribution.

The three countries have pledged to hammer out a framework for regulatory harmonization this year. They're also working on developing compatible screening practices for incoming travellers and cargo, and more co-operation on intelligence.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... iness/home

Ministers defend secrecy of talks

Canadian Press

Saturday, February 24, 2007

OTTAWA (CP) -- Top North American ministers deflected criticism that they had consulted only big business for their talks on trade and security rules, suggesting Friday there are "different venues" for public interest and labour groups to raise their concerns and suggestions.

The Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) is an ongoing dialogue between Canada, the United States and Mexico to find more common ground on issues ranging from border security to emergency preparedness. The group has an arm of business leaders that provides myriad recommendations, but has no formal mechanism for consulting the public at large.

"That type of thing happens in different venues in a host of other occasions, and we're pleased to note that as we work together on the issues we discussed today then the quality of life of all our citizens improves," Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day told reporters at the close of day-long meetings.

Day was flanked by his counterparts from Mexico and the United States, along with trade ministers from the three countries. The star attraction of the meetings was U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who appeared at a final news conference with Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay and Mexican Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa.

The talks were a lead-up to a meeting of the countries' leaders this August in Canada.

The SPP was struck by the leaders of the three countries in 2005 to enhance the continent's competitiveness, but for at least the first year received little attention with their dry talk on regulations and cutting down on paperwork. Recently, nationalist groups and politicians in Canada and the United States have raised alarm bells over the lack of formal consultation with either civil society or legislatures.

Some of the issues the ministers discussed during their meetings included finalizing a North American plan on dealing with a flu pandemic and another on a common regulatory environment in all three countries. That could include common food safety rules -- Canada currently has more stringent rules for fortified products. Insiders say the value of the SPP is that it puts the weight of ministers and national leaders behind projects that might normally languish for years among bureaucrats.

The issue of public consultation was at least identified during their meetings. In the final statement released by the ministers, they said they discussed the "importance of transparency and communication with stakeholders and the public."

NDP Leader Jack Layton raised the issue during Friday's question period in the Commons.

"The fact is, these discussions are worrisome to all Canadians. They have been incredibly secret from the get-go and there has been no public input," Layton said. "The government has not sought out the opinion of parliamentarians or the public on it. Of course the Conservatives think they know best."

The SPP's business arm, called the North America Competitiveness Council, rejected the criticism as misguided, saying that there was nothing secretive about their work or that of the partnership. Tom D'Aquino of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives said there hasn't been public input because most people aren't clued in to the issues.

"How do we take a lot of issues that are really quite important but frankly quite boring, they're not terribly exciting, and bring those to the public light so that people will discuss them? All I can say is that the more of this discussion that we have, the better ... and probably the faster that it will be to get results."

The council tabled a series of recommendations to the ministers, many of them revolving around the situation at the borders. They were critical of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, the American plan that will require passports at all points of entry by 2009. The report urged the governments to come up with a low-cost, secure alternative to the passport together. To date, there has been little progress on the countries coming up with a new ID card.

The group also urged the three governments to reduce the amount of customs transactions that automobiles and other big products made in North America face. The executives pointed out that cars produced overseas only have to go through one transaction, while cars made in North America -- with their parts sometimes manufactured in three different countries -- can face more than 28,000 transactions.

http://www.canada.com/components/print. ... a914edd400

I would of always thought this was in fact treason, but I guest treason only fulls under a enemy or helping a enemy. What would or should this be called. It is clearly writen to read that they went to do this to our country.

I'm scared that this will turn into a EU Like body. In it doe's in fact sound like it. This is likely to turn our country even more into mexico.

The SPP was struck by the leaders of the three countries in 2005 to enhance the continent's competitiveness, but for at least the first year received little attention with their dry talk on regulations and cutting down on paperwork. Recently, nationalist groups and politicians in Canada and the United States have raised alarm bells over the lack of formal consultation with either civil society or legislatures.

Well it is pretty galling to think that a few arrogant men and woman think they have the right to make such big decisions for a whole nation behind our back, and if they have to do it behind our back they had to know we would not agree with them. I know it sounds like treason but it is not. Its just a few who think they know what is best for our country and the other two.
So we have to get our congress to stop them, It is our highways we paid for them and it is our country we should say who and how many come into it, these countries do not belong to the few who think they have the right to change a whole nation to their liking, RICE, BUSH and buddies WE MUST STOP THEM!!!!!