Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Will Canada Become the 51st State?
The Vancouver Sun ^ | August 18, 2007 | By Kelly Patterson - CanWest News Service

Posted on 08/19/2007 6:40:35 PM PDT by JACKRUSSELL

To some, it is a "corporate coup d'etat," a conspiracy by big business to turn Canada into the 51st state by stealth. Others see it as a plot to destroy the U.S. by forcing it into a North American union with "socialist Canada" and "corrupt Mexico."

It is the Security and Prosperity Partnership, a sprawling effort to forge closer ties among the three nations in everything from anti-terrorism measures to energy strategies to food-safety and pesticide rules.

Launched two years ago by then prime minister Paul Martin, President George W. Bush and his Mexican counterpart, Vicente Fox, at the so-called Three Amigos summit in Waco, Tex., the SPP grew out of concerns that security crackdowns would cripple cross-border trade.

With juggernauts such as China and India looming on the horizon, the three countries agreed they had to act fast to stay competitive. Now the SPP has grown into a mind-boggling array of some 300 initiatives, involving 19 teams of bureaucrats from all three countries.

INTEGRATION BY STEALTH

Its stated mission is "to keep our borders closed to terrorism yet open to trade" by fostering "greater co-operation and information-sharing" in security protocols and economic areas such as product safety.

Little known in Canada, the accord, if implemented, could affect almost every aspect of Canadian life, from what drugs you can access to whether you can board a plane and even what ingredients go into your morning cornflakes.

While you may not have heard of the SPP, you may have heard about some of the controversies it has sparked: Canada's adoption of a no-fly list, negotiations to lower Canada's pesticide standards to U.S. levels or fears the deal will lead to bulk-water exports.

Liberal leader Stephane Dion charged Friday that, "under the veil of secrecy," Harper has let the Americans run roughshod over Canada, covertly using the SPP to impose a U.S. agenda on Canada. That's not what the Liberals intended when they signed the deal, which was meant to give Canada a stronger voice in Washington, not turn it into an"imitation" of the U.S., he says.

Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians says it is big business that is calling the shots, pushing aggressively for the harmonization -- and downgrading -- of everything from security norms to food standards, in a move that will lead to the "integration by stealth" of the three nations.

"Canadians would be shocked" if they knew the true scope of the SPP, says Barlow, whose Ottawa-based organization represents about 100,000 members.

Fringe groups such as the Canadian Action Party and the Minutemen in the U.S. go further, arguing the SPP is a plot to sweep all three nations into a North American union.

"Where are they getting this stuff?" says Thomas d'Aquino, head of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, which helped launch the SPP.

"This is a very nitty-gritty, workaday initiative" to make trade safer and more efficient through such steps as expanding border crossings and information-sharing programs on plant and animal safety, he says.

Other SPP projects are no-brainers, such as plans to cooperate in fighting West Nile virus and flu pandemics.

As for fears of a North American union, "anyone who believes that is smoking something," says d'Aquino.

This weekend, the debate hits the headlines across the nation as the three heads of state and their advisers converge on Montebello, Que., 60 kilometres east of Ottawa, for the SPP's third annual summit.

Thousands of protesters are also expected to descend on the area, hoping to confront the "Three Banditos" about a deal they say is a secretive sellout to the cowboy capitalism and militarism of the superpower to Canada's south.

"We always hoped from the outset we could broaden it beyond security," says Roland Paris, a University of Ottawa professor who worked as an adviser in the Privy Council Office when the SPP was launched. He adds that the SPP's architects hoped the "regular high-level meetings" would help "overcome bureaucratic inertia."

SOVEREIGNTY UNDER FIRE

But they also helped big business and its government allies bypass both the public and Parliament to push through a host of controversial changes without debate or scrutiny, critics charge. They say the accord has enshrined and fast-tracked a longstanding effort to quietly harmonize Canadian programs with those of the U.S. in everything from military policy to food and drug standards.

"The SPP is an unacceptable, closed-door process with enormous implications for Canadians," says NDP trade critic Peter Julian.

Roland Paris scoffs at charges the SPP is a grand design. If anything, he says, it is a timid collection of piddling efforts that has become bogged down in bureaucratic red tape.

"This is not a political vision of the future of the continent. If it were, it would be worth the fuss."

Defenders of the SPP dismiss concerns about regulatory change as fear-mongering, saying the accord aims only to cut out minor, needless variations between the three countries.

The goal is to end the "tyranny of small differences" that can turn the border into a theatre of the absurd, says John Kirton, a University of Toronto professor and expert in the environmental effects of free trade.

If fact, the SPP could dramatically raise standards across North America, proponents say, because it promotes information-sharing among the three countries.

Scientists would swap data on everything from car safety to new chemicals, enabling regulators to better evaluate products and react more quickly to public health threats.

The SPP also includes projects with obvious benefits for all three nations, such as reducing sulphur in fuel and air pollution from ships, and coordinating efforts to curb plant and animal diseases.

All three governments insist that the three nations remain sovereign under the SPP: If Canada doesn't like the way the U.S. does something, it can go its own way.

But NDP trade critic Julian is not so sure. He worries about the effect regulatory convergence will have in the future.

If, for example, Canada wants to pass new rules to deal with greenhouse gases, it could mean "Canada would have to go to Washington and lobby for the kinds of standards and protections they want," he says.


TOPICS: Canada; Mexico; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: blamecanada; canada; cheeseandwhine; cuespookymusic; naunion; spp
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-75 next last

1 posted on 08/19/2007 6:40:37 PM PDT by JACKRUSSELL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

Nope. I’d rather fly duty free to Puerto Rico as our Fifty-First State, Thank You!

Nothing against Canadians...who tend to run in my family, Eh! :)


2 posted on 08/19/2007 6:43:17 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin (Save The Earth. It's The Only Planet With Chocolate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

Can we take in Alberta and forget the rest?


3 posted on 08/19/2007 6:43:49 PM PDT by sionnsar (trad-anglican.faithweb.com |Iran Azadi| 5yst3m 0wn3d - it's N0t Y0ur5 (SONY) | UN: Useless Nations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin

I will control ALL BEER!!!!!


4 posted on 08/19/2007 6:46:05 PM PDT by Moleman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin
Will Canada Become the 51st State?

NO, only those Provinces which vote to join the USA and are voted in by our population. Actually, I can think of some rather nice "Trades" of States for Provinces!

5 posted on 08/19/2007 6:48:31 PM PDT by ExSES (the "bottom-line")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fanfan
Ping
6 posted on 08/19/2007 6:49:58 PM PDT by kanawa (Don't go where you're looking, look where you're going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fanfan; GMMAC

Ping.


7 posted on 08/19/2007 6:50:56 PM PDT by Springman (Why is ? coming up, when I use ')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

I thought the Canadians wanted to preserve their current status as a colony like Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands.


8 posted on 08/19/2007 6:52:07 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (NYT Headline: Protocols of the Learned Elders of CBS: Fake but Accurate, Experts Say)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExSES

That’s sounds nice...the voters of a state get to choose what country they want to belong too...US or Canada. But then I suppose you’ll get at least one state voting for outright sovereignty...


9 posted on 08/19/2007 6:52:18 PM PDT by Santa Fe_Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

I’d rather it not. One: It’s forcing the “no borders” globalist agenda, and two: their health care sucks and it would likely be pushed for in the rest of the country. The hockey’s good though, that’d be the only plus. Though I wouldn’t mind just taking conservative Alberta and leaving the rest.


10 posted on 08/19/2007 6:52:42 PM PDT by G8 Diplomat (From my fist to Harry Reid's face)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

How about a trade? Massachusetts for Alberta? Toss in San Francisco for Vancouver as well.


11 posted on 08/19/2007 6:52:54 PM PDT by FormerACLUmember (The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExSES
I can think of some rather nice "Trades" of States for Provinces!

Hey, that hurts!

12 posted on 08/19/2007 6:53:09 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (NYT Headline: Protocols of the Learned Elders of CBS: Fake but Accurate, Experts Say)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sionnsar

If they came in they wd have to be ready for the Muzzies


13 posted on 08/19/2007 6:53:17 PM PDT by reefdiver (The sheriff of Nottingham collected taxes on behalf of the common good)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin
The 51st State will be Saudi Israelia
14 posted on 08/19/2007 6:53:39 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (The Simpsons already dis it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

I’ll take the western provinces. The rest can join France.


15 posted on 08/19/2007 6:54:07 PM PDT by Poser (Willing to fight for oil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

For years and years, The POQ has been trying to break away from Canada and either become their own country or be annexed by the United States. When I was growing up, many moons ago, people were planning this. This is nothing new to Quebec. As far as the rest of Canada, They would rather not have any part or be part of the US. Personally, I believe it would be a mistake to allow Canada to become the 51st state. Many problems would occur due to this. Mostly, an overload on our medical system/ It’s broken now, it would devastate the program if that many people were introduced into it. I think the US has enough problems of her own, not to pick up someone else’s problems like buying a used car.


16 posted on 08/19/2007 6:57:09 PM PDT by antiunion person (THOMPSON/PAUL 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antiunion person

If Canada were to enter the US, which it won’t, it would be as a number of states, not a single one.

Canada as a single state would be larger than the other 50 combined, which would be kind of silly.


17 posted on 08/19/2007 7:01:55 PM PDT by Sherman Logan (It's not the heat, it's the stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
I can think of some rather nice "Trades" of States for Provinces!

Hey, that hurts!

Don't worry, there are many likeminded Canadians who will welcome you with open arms and admiration for your tax structure (which they ultimately will find to be too "generous" to allow to exist).

In addition, Canada recently had a legal decision which allows its citizens to purchase health insurance policies!

18 posted on 08/19/2007 7:04:02 PM PDT by ExSES (the "bottom-line")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL
ALL YOUR EAGLE ARE BELONG TO US

Near Grand Rapids, Manitoba
19 posted on 08/19/2007 7:09:28 PM PDT by kanawa (Don't go where you're looking, look where you're going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin
Nope. I’d rather fly duty free to Puerto Rico as our Fifty-First State

Wait a minute! I thought Israel was our 51st State! Or no, is it Iraq? Or Germany? Or South Korea? Guam? Mexico?

I am sooo confused!

Best regards,

20 posted on 08/19/2007 7:14:51 PM PDT by Copernicus (Mary Carpenter Speaks About Gun Control http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=7CCB40F421ED4819)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

I say yes, but only if we get to rename it “Canuckistan”...


21 posted on 08/19/2007 7:15:04 PM PDT by Bean Counter (Stout Hearts...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL
I want to be able to travel to Canada without having to pay almost a hundred bucks for a friggin' passport.
22 posted on 08/19/2007 7:18:25 PM PDT by Ciexyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin

Actually, they’d be the 54th State after Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia and Mexico.


23 posted on 08/19/2007 7:20:34 PM PDT by Tall_Texan (Global warming? Hell, in Texas, we just call that "summer".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kanawa

You made me laugh milk out of my nose.


24 posted on 08/19/2007 7:21:31 PM PDT by kbennkc (For those who have fought for it , freedom has a flavor the protected will never know. F Troop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ExSES

We get:

Alberta
Saskatchewan

They get:

Vermont
The coast of CA, OR, and WA
Maine


25 posted on 08/19/2007 7:22:35 PM PDT by RockinRight (Fred Thompson once set fire to a crowd of liberals simply by puffing his cigar and staring real hard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

http://www.unitednorthamerica.org

yes, multiple states not one.


26 posted on 08/19/2007 7:26:57 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

Will Canada Become the 51st State?

I thought they already were.


27 posted on 08/19/2007 7:28:21 PM PDT by svcw (There is no plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G8 Diplomat
... Though I wouldn’t mind just taking conservative Alberta and leaving the rest.

Would the NFL have to have 100 Meter fields?.........

28 posted on 08/19/2007 7:32:47 PM PDT by Red Badger (ALL that CARBON in ALL that oil & coal was once in the atmospere. We're just putting it back!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

The group’s problem appears to be that there is very nearly zero desire for such a union in either country.

I wouldn’t personally be averse to some of the Canadian provinces joining, if their people desired to, but I’m not interested enough to spend time promoting the idea.

The Canadians in many ways have the best of both worlds. They are protected against any potential threat by the US military, which they don’t have to pay for, and they can spend their time lecturing us about the evils of our militarism.


29 posted on 08/19/2007 7:33:58 PM PDT by Sherman Logan (It's not the heat, it's the stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
Canada as a single state would be larger than the other 50 combined...

Not after Globull Warming takes effect..........

30 posted on 08/19/2007 7:34:25 PM PDT by Red Badger (ALL that CARBON in ALL that oil & coal was once in the atmospere. We're just putting it back!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL; Disgusted in Texas; B Knotts; ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton; corbos; NYFreeper; Alexius; ..
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

31 posted on 08/19/2007 7:35:25 PM PDT by narses (...the spirit of Trent is abroad once more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight
They get:

Vermont
The coast of CA, OR, and WA
Maine

Hey, they don't get San Diego.

32 posted on 08/19/2007 7:37:52 PM PDT by mhx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: svcw

Shouldn’t be too tough to do. The dollars are almost equivalent and they drive on the correct side of the road.

The multi-lingual signs have to go, though.


33 posted on 08/19/2007 7:38:17 PM PDT by SnuffaBolshevik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Canadian land lost to sea rise would be mostly in the North, where very few people live anyway. Meanwhile, the US loses most of FL, LA and other heavily populated areas.

Global warming would make a lot more of Canada inhabitable. I think they’d be a net gainer.

What would really screw Canada over would be a renewed ice age. :)


34 posted on 08/19/2007 7:38:22 PM PDT by Sherman Logan (It's not the heat, it's the stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

Yuck! No thanks. Republicans would never win another election. Happy to have them where they are, 80% of them huddled within 100 miles of our border.


35 posted on 08/19/2007 7:41:04 PM PDT by Roy Tucker ("You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality"--Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
What would really screw Canada over would be a renewed ice age. :)

Nah, year round hockey and the skiing would be awesome!........

36 posted on 08/19/2007 7:41:37 PM PDT by Red Badger (ALL that CARBON in ALL that oil & coal was once in the atmospere. We're just putting it back!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Have you considered moving to Greenland or Antarctica?


37 posted on 08/19/2007 7:45:34 PM PDT by Sherman Logan (It's not the heat, it's the stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Copernicus

It is confusing, isn’t it? Pretty soon all the Americans will be overseas, and all the foreigners will be here.

Wait until the Canadians find out they will have to switch to low flush toilets. Then you’ll see open rebellion!

And then there’s this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RHVoFpncgA


38 posted on 08/19/2007 7:45:41 PM PDT by Pining_4_TX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

that’s stupid.

we can’t run our own country.


39 posted on 08/19/2007 7:48:25 PM PDT by ken21 (28 yrs +2 families = banana republic junta. si.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL
The framework for a North American super-state already exists. It's called the U.S. Constitution.

There's just one problem: the Socialists hate the Constitution. That's the reason for the SPP...they can write up their own Constitution to replace the current one.

40 posted on 08/19/2007 7:54:45 PM PDT by rabscuttle385 (Sic Semper Tyrannis * U.Va. Engineering '09 * Friends Don't Let Friends Vote Democrat * Fred in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

We could do a lot worse than including Alberta as a 51st state.


41 posted on 08/19/2007 7:59:24 PM PDT by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

Headline makes no sense — if this idea ever went forward it could not be that all of Canada would come in as one “51st state” — there would be at least 10 new states based upon current provinces.... but there would be great controversy about allotting 2 US Senators to the most sparsely populated provinces such as PEI, Nova Scotia, Yukon, etc. I see that the website does not allot senators to some of those entities, but it would be highly controversial either way.

I cannot see most people on either side of the border going for this, but who knows? As a US citizen with some Canadian ancestry I am not automatically averse to the idea, but it could be terrible if it merely cemented rampant socialism north and south, and that seems to be the most likely outcome.


42 posted on 08/19/2007 8:02:20 PM PDT by Enchante (Reid and Pelosi Defeatocrats: Surrender Now - Peace for Our Time!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Nah. Since the majority of the country uses the English units, we’d make the Albertans use ‘em too.


43 posted on 08/19/2007 8:08:19 PM PDT by G8 Diplomat (From my fist to Harry Reid's face)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mhx

Give ‘em Massachusetts too.


44 posted on 08/19/2007 8:10:36 PM PDT by G8 Diplomat (From my fist to Harry Reid's face)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: FormerACLUmember
Toss in San Francisco for Vancouver as well.

No, Vancouver sucks. It's like Seattle north. We'll give them San Fransisco for Saskatchewan.
45 posted on 08/19/2007 8:14:29 PM PDT by G8 Diplomat (From my fist to Harry Reid's face)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

What is the SPP?


46 posted on 08/19/2007 8:17:35 PM PDT by Centurion2000 (“Jesus Saves. Moses Delivers. Cthulu Reposesses...”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
It is the Security and Prosperity Partnership, a sprawling effort to forge closer ties among the three nations in everything from anti-terrorism measures to energy strategies to food-safety and pesticide rules.

Think European Community but for North America.

We all know where that ended up.

47 posted on 08/19/2007 8:24:15 PM PDT by rabscuttle385 (Sic Semper Tyrannis * U.Va. Engineering '09 * Friends Don't Let Friends Vote Democrat * Fred in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: antiunion person

There are only 33 million Canadians. Their strain on our medical system wouldn’t be that huge. Plus Canada has a wealth of natural resources. Oil, wood, hydropower, metals, hockey.


48 posted on 08/19/2007 8:25:04 PM PDT by CollegeRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sionnsar

go Flames!


49 posted on 08/19/2007 8:30:07 PM PDT by Disciplinemisanthropy (...and that, friends, is what grinds my gears.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JACKRUSSELL

I really like you...as a friend.


50 posted on 08/19/2007 8:31:27 PM PDT by ari-freedom (I am for traditional moral values, a strong national defense, and free markets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-75 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson