NAFTA Again Under Fire

Attacking NAFTA appears to have been a favorite"wrong" with the clause? Nearly half of the 49 claims
sport among North American exporters and politiciansfiled to date have to do with governments imposing
for years. The recent barrage of fire came fromenvironmental restrictions and meddling with resource
Democratic presidential hopefuls Barack Obama andmanagement.
Hillary Clinton. To this, Canada's three "stooges," theAnd then there are the border issues. Partly, NAFTA
Prime Minister, the Trade Minister and the Financeis sadly imperfect in this particular area, because it is
Minister, responded with utmost disgust. Well,a trilateral agreement. For example, Canada would like
perhaps not "utmost," since all three would like tothe U.S. to stop treating its northern border the same
change a thing or two about NAFTA that botheredway it treats its southern border with Mexico. The
them as well, but they would not go so far as toreasoning is that problems at the north U.S. border
bring the whole thing under very public scrutiny.are not the same as the problems at its south
Since 1994, when Canada, the U.S. and Mexico signedborder, which is certainly the truth, but for the U.S. to
the treaty, there were three distinct areas thatactually admit it would most likely not fare well with
never quite worked: the dispute resolution system,Hispanic voters.
investors' ability to sue governments, and more andImagine this: U.S. Homeland Security is pondering
more security layering at the countries' borders.building a fence in the north that would match the
While the dispute resolution system worked for theone that is being built in the south. Never mind the
most part, Canada and the U.S. have been madefact that the Canada-U.S. border is 8,900 kilometers
painfully aware of its imperfections, to say the least,long (versus "only" 3,100 kilometers with Mexico), but
through the softwood lumber dispute. The disputejust how many Canadians does anyone expect to
lasted for decades and has yet to be resolvedswim across the Detroit River searching for better
through NAFTA. Recently, the softwood lumber issuejobs in the U.S.?
has been transferred to the London Court ofThrough border issues is how we arrive at what is
Arbitration, a private court typically used to settlewrong with NAFTA and its potential resolution. As
private companies' disputes, not disputes betweensigned in 1994, NAFTA is a trilateral treaty. However,
countries.there is no comparison between Canada and Mexico
Investors' ability to sue governments has been aand their respective relationships with the U.S. So,
sore point for years, too. It was the U.S. that insistedhow about going back to pre-NAFTA days and
upon this clause and, as far as anyone knows, onlyhaving different bilateral treaties, Canada with the U.S.
lawyers have received any benefit from it (of theand Mexico with the U.S., separately, and a number
monetary kind, of course). As far as Canada isof them, instead of a blanket and a poorly
concerned, it would most likely and enthusiasticallyfunctioning one?
vote to have it scrapped once and for all. What's