[ad_1]
OTTAWA – As part of the current renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the National Post examined "secret" cabinet documents that shed light on how the agreement was reached. been concluded.
under the Access to Information Act, show how Canadian ministers were briefed on the final stages of the 1992 NAFTA negotiations under the leadership of Prime Minister Brian Mulroney
. international business – proof that the initial parameters of the agreement and the initial priorities of the Canadian government are still very sensitive in today 's precarious trade relations with the United States.
Here are five things we learned.
The deadline changed
In March 1992, the then Minister of Commerce, Michael Wilson, declared that an agreement could be reached as early as the following month. "While there remains a lot of difficult negotiations, there is a reasonable prospect of concluding the deal in April," he told ministers.
Later that month, Wilson announced "modest progress but no major breakthroughs". In early May, Mr. Wilson said that there had been "positive results" at recent meetings and that a final meeting could be held in two weeks
. Later in May, the final product was expected in early July. By mid-July, an agreement was possible before the next cabinet meeting. At the end of July, Wilson said the end was in sight, and "all that's left are the hard questions." He was closer to the mark than time.
In the end, to an ovation from his colleagues, Wilson pointed to an agreement reached on August 12, 1992, shortly before the election of new Democratic President Bill Clinton.Clinton endorsed the document that Republican President George Bush Sr. had negotiated, and he entered in force on January 1, 1994.
The deal-breakers were the same
Although Mulroney's counterpart was not Donald Trump The problems at stake in 1992 seem A mid-century later, in mid-May, when Mulroney was about to travel to Washington, he told his ministers that further discussions on NAFTA would be held. "In the light of the US's final decision on timber" In the NAFTA negotiations themselves, the priorities included the protection of agricultural sectors subject to supply management and cultural industries.
Although many details are redacted, the main obstacles to the end of negotiations, as today, include the rules of automotive origin. During a cabinet meeting two weeks prior to the conclusion of the agreement, discussions focused on the dispute resolution mechanisms of Chapter 19.
The chapter, which provides binational review of anti-dumping and countervailing duties The Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the United States, which came into force on January 1, 1989, was a "red line" in 1992, although the United States preferred to settle these disputes in their national courts. it remains in 2018.
Government Focused on the Environment
Domestic Policy Encouraged Canadian Government to Ensure Sustainability Provisions Until March 1992, the then Minister of the Environment, Jean Charest, feared that the government "would be vulnerable." on the environment if it left negative badumptions.
In July In conclusion of an agreement, one of the main points raised during a discussion on the communication of NAFTA was that the environment would be "an issue major in the defense of NAFTA and on which we have a number of positive things to say.
At the conclusion of the agreement, Mr. Wilson emphasized that environmental sustainability is a "new and innovative ingredient for a trade agreement," a message that has also been publicly reported. "In fact, it has more environmental provisions than any other trade agreement," he notes in his notes.
Trade was not the number one priority
never first on the list of topics to consider. In 1992, Canadian troops were in Yugoslavia and at home, national unity was in first place in an ongoing constitutional crisis
"Of all the difficult issues that we have dealt with together, none of them has been in any way whatsoever. is more important than the unity of Canada ". Mulroney told Cabinet in August. "Nothing we have achieved together will be important if we can not preserve the country's unity."
Aboriginal self-government and Senate reform were important topics in this discussion. The minutes of the meetings show that ministers were privately discussing how to "weaken" the Senate in the context of constitutional talks with the provinces, since eliminating it completely, as some preferred, seemed impossible [19659003]. in order to "provide more flexibility and room for maneuver". They were asked not to answer journalists' questions at the cabinet meetings. The NAFTA, while of major importance, was far from being the most sensitive issue on the table.
The public did not pay much attention
Little public attention was given to Canada. American FTA. The then Minister of Justice, Kim Campbell, told cabinet in the spring of 1992 that "the public's ignorance was huge about the benefits" of this agreement and that a major educational campaign was necessary.
the government had to better explain why Canada was participating in the NAFTA negotiations. At the time, according to the documents, less than a fifth of Canadians felt that the federal government was doing a good job in the economy, and polls showed that people were wondering why the government was "so secretive about commercial files".
In May, these concerns continued, prompting the cabinet to approve a $ 3 million communications plan. things are more difficult, but "the absence of question period will help".
The Cabinet Economic Committee heard an update of communications at the end of August. NAFTA media coverage "declined rapidly" after its announcement, and ministers' constituents accorded "very little attention". "Among the very few comments from the public, most were positive or neutral," according to meeting notes. "The government should strive to maintain the current very low profile of the NAFTA discussion."
• Email: [email protected] | Twitter: mariedanielles
[ad_2]
Source link
