Canada Sending Frigate To Eastern Europe

Canada sending frigate to join NATO in eastern Europe

STEVEN CHASE

Ottawa — The Globe and Mail

Published Wednesday, Apr. 30 2014, 3:15 PM EDT

Last updated Wednesday, Apr. 30 2014, 4:23


Canada is dispatching the frigate HMCS Regina to join the NATO military alliance’s efforts to beef up security in central and eastern Europe as the crisis in Ukraine deepens.

The ship is currently deployed in the Arabian Sea and will join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s Standing Maritime Forces “as part of NATO’s reassurance package,” the Canadian government said.

On Tuesday Canada sent six CF-18 fighters to Romania to help with air patrols of NATO members as neighbours of Russia remain anxious over Russia’s territorial ambitions.The Conservative government would not immediately say where the HMCS Regina is heading now.

“Russia’s illegal occupation of Ukraine and provocative military activity remains a serious concern to the international community,” Prime Minister Stephen Harper said.

“Canada remains committed to working with our NATO Allies to promote the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-sending-frigate-to-nato-security-effort-in-eastern-europe/article18343817/

Stephen Harper Stepping Up!

After Harper's comments, Putin cast as pariah at G8 hare on pr

Steve Rennie, The Canadian Press

Published Monday, June 17, 2013 11:26AM EDT 

ENNISKILLEN -- If this G8 meeting if any indication, the next gathering of world leaders in Russia is shaping up to be a strained affair.

A chasm has emerged between Russian President Vladimir Putin and the rest of the Group of Eight leaders over the deepening crisis in Syria.

That division was laid bare on Sunday night when Prime Minister Stephen Harper called Putin, who hosts the G20 summit in St. Petersburg in September, the outlier of the G8.

RELATED STORIES

• Harper rules out arms for Syrian rebels, blasts Russians
• Harper says no reservations about G8 proposal to fight tax havens
• Cameron wants G8, including Russia, to unite in diplomatic push for Syria talks

PHOTOS

Russian President Vladimir Putin arrives at Belfast International Airport, in Northern Ireland, on Monday, June 17, 2013. (AP Photo/ Peter Muhly, Pool)

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper at the G8 Summit in Enniskillin, Northern Ireland, Monday June 17, 2013. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld

How to persuade Putin to drop his seemingly unshakable support for the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad is the main challenge facing the other leaders at this meeting at the lakeside Lough Erne resort in Northern Ireland.

The bloody Syrian conflict has now raged for two years and at least 93,000 people have died.

Tensions escalated last week after the United States announced it would begin arming opponents of Assad's regime.

Russia -- which is in the G8 and has a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council -- has been highly critical of the U.S. move to give weapons and ammunition to the rebels.

"One does not really need to support the people who not only kill their enemies, but open up their bodies, eat their intestines in front of the public and cameras," a Reuters report quoted Putin as saying.

"Are these the people you want to support? Are they the ones you want to supply with weapons? Then this probably has little relation to the humanitarian values preached in Europe for hundreds of years."

Putin was apparently referring to a Syrian rebel commander caught on tape last month cutting into a dead soldier and biting into one of his organs.

Russia has steadfastly stuck with the Syrian regime even as the United States claims to have proof that forces loyal to Assad have used chemical weapons. Russian officials have dismissed those claims, saying they're based on flimsy evidence

Harper -- speaking on the eve of the summit -- said Putin is unlikely to drop his support for Assad at this gathering of the leaders of the world's eight wealthiest countries.

In doing so, Harper all but called Putin the pariah of the G8 when it comes to Syria.

"Look, I think that dialogue will be interesting. I think it's important to have that kind of dialogue," Harper said Sunday night in Dublin. "But I don't think we should fool ourselves. This is G7 plus one. OK, let's be blunt. That's what this is, G7 plus one.

"We in the West have a very different perspective on this situation. Mr. Putin and his government are supporting the thugs of the Assad regime for their own reasons that I do not think are justifiable and Mr. Putin knows my view on that."

British Prime Minister David Cameron on Monday said he hoped to narrow the gap between Putin and the other leaders over the course of the two-day summit.

Two senior Canadian government officials, who spoke to journalists on the condition their names not be published, said Putin can expect an earful from the rest of the G8.

"It won't be an easy discussion," one of the officials said.

"They get heated sometimes," added the second official, "particularly on these kinds of issues."

They also underscored what's at stake in these closed-door talks.

"It's part of the ebb and flow of the G8," the second official said. "You know, we had a different position from Russia on Libya and yet we managed to have that discussion and I think the value of the G8 is the small format.

"Leaders can have frank discussions behind closed doors. So this is not the first time it's happened where there's been a core difference of opinion among G8 members. You're right, this one's serious. So was Libya."

The Harper government, meanwhile, announced Monday that Canada would give $90 million in new humanitarian assistance to Syria this year. That's on top of $100 million announced on Sunday to help Jordan cope with the fallout from the Syrian conflict.

Read more:http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/after-harper-s-comments-putin-cast-as-pariah-at-g8-summit-1.1328939#ixzz2WUTo0rIW

Biggest Jobs Gain In A Decade

Great numbers coming out of Eastern Canada, let's hope that this is the start of a trend and that employment starts to accelerate. Our numbers out west are weaker than expected but not surprising with the late spring/construction season.

Could we be starting to a rebound from Quebec and Ontario? Too soon to say but this is a good start, if we see this carry on for a few more months then we may be onto something.

I still feel that our country needs to figure out what to do with Atlantic Canada though. In the States the work force is much more mobile, they will go where the jobs are. Here in Canada our safety net system has become so liberalized that people will spend half of their lives unemployed or severely under-employed in Atlantic Canada while other jurisdictions are crying for workers. It may be high time the government reams in our employment insurance system so that it encourages more mobility. The rest of Canada should not have to continually pumps billions of dollars into economies in Atlantic Canada that cannot sustain itself. Their unemployment rate is typically 12%, that in no way is sustainable you simply need more employment in order to sustain the services for everyone who is needs them.

This may sound mean and all but some times some bad tasting medicine is the best for you. These people don't want to have to leave but should they be held up by the safety net for life? I don't think this is what the system was put in place for. It is not good for them and their families, nor good for local , provincial and federal governments to keep propping them up. Make it harder to continually be on un-employment year in year out and make it easier for them to get better training and maybe some help with moving to jurisdictions where the jobs are. There is no reason in this nation that our unemployment rate should ever be 7%, we should be trying for 3-4% tops.

Canada posts biggest jobs gain in more than a decade

TAVIA GRANT - ECONOMICS REPORTER

The Globe and Mail

Published Friday, Jun. 07 2013, 8:33 AM EDT

Last updated Friday, Jun. 07 2013, 10:31 AM EDT

The Canadian economy churned out 95,000 jobs last month, the second-biggest monthly gain on record, mostly in full-time positions in the private sector.

The jump in job creation is the largest since August, 2002, and sent the country’s jobless rate down a notch to 7.1 per cent in May, Statistics Canada said Friday. The increase was eight times what economists had expected.

The report shows a comeback in the private sector, where job creation had been lacklustre in preceding two months, a reflection of shaky business confidence. Last month, construction accounted for nearly half the job gains, with the retail, trade and business support services sectors also adding to head count.

“A pleasant surprise after a string of generally soft job gains in the prior six months,” said Avery Shenfeld, chief economist at CIBC World Markets in a note.

Jobs numbers have been volatile in recent months and one month does not make a trend. A smoothed-out average over the last half year shows gains of 19,000 a month, “indicative of a job creation engine chugging along, as opposed to revving up, noted Sonya Gulati, senior economist at Toronto-Dominion Bank.

She expects job creation to average 10,000 to 20,000 a month through the rest of this year.

Private companies led the way. The private sector added 94,600 positions while the public sector created 6,600 jobs. Self employment fell by 6,200. The construction sector added 42,700 jobs, the biggest gain on record.

Wage gains, though still modest, are running above the rate of inflation, with average hourly wages growing 2.3 per cent in May from last year.

Youth – a segment that has struggled in the job market – saw improvements in May. Employment among those aged 15 to 24 rose 54,400, pushing their jobless rate to 13.6 per cent from 14.5 per cent in April.

Core-aged workers saw little employment change while those over the age of 55 saw 34,000 new positions.

By province, employment rose in Ontario, Quebec, Alberta, New Brunswick and Manitoba. A gain of 50,600 jobs in Ontario sent the province’s unemployment rate to 7.3 per cent, the lowest rate since November, 2008.

Unemployment rates fell in every province from Manitoba east, while they rose in the Western provinces. Saskatchewan has the lowest jobless rate in the country, at 4.5 per cent.

Compared with a year earlier, employment has grown 1.4 per cent or by 250,000, all in full-time positions.

Federal Conservatives Unraveling?

Is this the beginning of the end for the federal Conservative party as it currently sits? Is this going to be the start of calls made quietly for Harper to step down and have a new leader for the next election?

Having met Mr. Harper and finding him a very sincere person I think it may be time for the conservative movement to look for a successor. Although getting no kudos from the left leaning media for guiding Canada through some very rough waters the past 5 years or so, Prime Minister Harper has done a great job. Our country is strong coming out of the world wide recession that still grips most of Europe and our neighbours to the south. Though not helped by provincial governments here, looking at you BC, Quebec and Ontario! Were it not for these three governments fighting anything the Harper government put forth to move our country forward I think we may have been in an even better position than we currently are.

So, what do we need in a new leader? Well, one that is more open to the media for starters! You know that any conservative leader will be vilified via the media, you still need to be able to get your message across and let the voters decide who to believe. So a more outgoing leader is a must in my opinion.

Our next leader should also work on transparency within government and stick to it, meaning if we elect you to clean up government, do so! This is where this conservative party has failed us. We want a clean, lean government and they have failed to provide us with one.

Cut spending, our next leader needs to sign onto deep cuts in government spending. We do not need the federal government creating an economy with spending. Mr. Harper buckled under pressure by the EU and President Obama to turn the taps on and spend out of recession. Although not going as far as some would have liked I feel we spent and continue to spend too much.

Our next leader should start to move the Canadian economy away from depending on resources and into the new era of technology. We need to foster growth in this industry as it is the way of the future and we currently are being left behind. We need to entice companies to set up her, develop here, we need to have our universities involved in the science, we need more in order to remain relevant in the world. Our dependence on resources as a major driver of the economy although has served us well in the past should not be looked at as a leader in our future. Most resources are finite and if we do not move on to a more technology based economy I fear for our nation's future. Our next leader should call on companies, universities, provinces and more to invest, foster and make our nation attractive for businesses to come to Canada, this is the future.

Our new leader must tackle immigration as well. Our immigration system is so flawed that a complete tear down may be required. We have provinces(Alberta & Saskatchewan) that desperately need immigrants but are being handcuffed by the federal limits. While provinces such ad Ontario, Quebec and BC have much higher unemployment numbers and continue to take in their quota of immigrants. Either raise the quota for the provinces that need more or have an overall quota for all of Canada and limit areas with higher unemployment. Makes sense doesn't it? I mean do provinces with over 7% unemployemnt and much large under-empoyment rates really need to bring in more immigrants while other provinces are crying for help, help that would drive growth across the nation and help out the "have not" provinces?

Is it time for a new leader, I think it is, but feel Harper is content trying his hand at the next election. This I feel will be a terrible mistake and hand the country over to Trudeau who has proven time and time again that he is not a person capable of leading a nation.

Dismayed Conservatives confront news that MP Brent Rathgeber has quit Harper’s caucus

 

 

BY MIKE DE SOUZA & MICHAEL WOODS, POSTMEDIA NEWS JUNE 6, 2013 11:08 AM

 

 

• STORY
• PHOTOS ( 1 )

 

 

Conservative MP Brent Rathgeber

Photograph by: THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick , Postmedia News

OTTAWA — Alberta MP Brent Rathgeber’s decision to quit the federal Conservative caucus over what he believes is a lack of commitment to transparency by the government left his Tory colleagues in turmoil Thursday.

Several said they were disappointed by the news. Rathgeber announced his decision late Wednesday, saying the government was trying to dilute a private member’s bill he has introduced on financial disclosure of senior public service salaries. He fears the government is not living up to its own rhetoric on transparency and openness in government.

Conservative government whip Gordon O’Connor disagreed, saying Rathgeber would have to explain himself.

“We are open and transparent,” O’Connor said. “We provide all the financial information. Every day we explain what we’re doing. We have announcements here all the time. There’s no secrets going on. People know what’s going on in the government.”

Some Conservative MPs, including John Williamson, a New Brunswick MP and former head of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation which supports more transparency, declined to comment.

Ontario Tory MP Larry Miller said he had supported the intent of a financial transparency bill for public servants that Rathgeber has been trying to have passed, but had concerns it could actually drive up wages of some senior government officials.

“At the same time, if his bill was totally gutted, which it sounds like that’s what he’s ticked off about, then I have some concerns. But until I actually see what came out of the committee or whatever, I can’t really comment,” said Miller.

Rathgeber tweeted his decision to sit as an independent from  the Conservative caucus after the governing party rewrote his legislation designed to improve transparency about federal records and information.

“My decision to resign from the CPC caucus is because of the government’s lack of commitment to transparency and open government,” the Edmonton MP wrote on his Twitter account late Wednesday.

Thursday morning, in an extensive blog post, he called it the “straw that broke the camel’s back.”

My decision to resign from the CPC Caucus is because of the Government’s lack of commitment to transparency and open government.

— Brent Rathgeber, MP (@brentrathgeber) June 6, 2013

The government had just voted major changes to his bill, which would be similar to “sunshine” laws in some provinces by requiring highly paid public servants to disclose their salaries at federal departments and agencies as well as Crown corporations such as the CBC. The Conservatives amended it so that the minimum salary that would trigger public disclosures would be more than $444,000, not the $188,000 level Rathgeber proposed.

A spokesman for the prime minister’s office confirmed via Twitter that Rathgeber had resigned from caucus, and said the MP should resign from the House of Commons. “The people of Edmonton-St. Albert elected a Conservative Member of Parliament. Mr. Rathgeber should resign and run in a by-election,” Andrew MacDougall wrote.

The people of Edmonton-St. Albert elected a Conservative Member of Parliament. Mr. Rathgeber should resign and run in a by-election. (2/2) — Andrew MacDougall (@PMO_MacDougall) June 6, 2013

“It really smacks of hypocrisy,” Rathgeber told the CBC, referring to MacDougall’s comments. “It’s a little rich.” He pointed to the example of David Emerson, who quit the Liberal caucus after the 2006 election to join the Tories. The Conservatives did not suggest he should run in a byelection.

In his blog entry posted, entitled “I Stand Alone,” Rathgeber outlined the rationale for his decision.

“Clearly, the Government’s decision not to support my Private Member’s Bill on CBC and Public Sector disclosure and transparency in Committee was the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back; however, this decision and my comfort level in caucus has been evolving for at least a year.”

“Recent allegations concerning expense scandals and the Government’s response has been extremely troubling. I joined the Reform/conservative movements because I thought we were somehow different, a band of Ottawa outsiders riding into town to clean the place up, promoting open government and accountability.  I barely recognize ourselves, and worse I fear that we have morphed into what we once mocked.

“My constituents demand better.  My constituents simply do not care what somebody, who they hope will never become Prime Minister, did or didn’t do seventeen years ago. They do care, however, about the relations between a sitting Senator and Langevin Block (PMO).  For a government that was elected on a platform of accountability, my constituents are gravely disappointed.

“I still support and greatly respect the Prime Minister; I continue to question the decisions and actions of many of his advisors.  I will continue to support the government generally, but not unequivocally.  I will deploy my independent vote on a case by case, issue by issue basis.

“I can only compromise so much before I begin to not recognize myself.  I no longer recognize much of the party that I joined and whose principles (at least on paper), I still believe in.  Accordingly, since I can no longer stand with them, I must now stand alone.”

Tory MP Mark Warawa responded to Rathgeber’s announcement via Twitter on Wednesday, saying, “Brent, you are a man of integrity and will be missed.”

@brentrathgeber Brent, you are a man of integrity and will be missed.

— Mark Warawa (@MPmarkwarawa) June 6, 2013

Two days before the amendments to his bill were made, Rathgeber had recommended a sweeping review of existing laws granting people access to government records, saying that Canada is a “laggard” in making information available to taxpayers.

He made the comments this week as a parliamentary committee continued its review of the private member’s bill which would expand the existing federal access to information law.

NDP MP Alexandre Boulerice said Thursday that the resignation from Tory caucus shows that Conservatives, who had come to change Ottawa, were being changed themselves. He also said some Tory MPs are privately complaining that they no longer have the freedom to speak freely without permission from the prime minister, and are warning opposition members to be careful they don’t suffer the same fate.

But Miller rejected Rathgeber’s suggestions that the Conservative party had changed.

“That’s totally wrong,” Miller said. “I’m sure that Brent said some things when he was not in very good humour and that’s fine. But I totally disagree with that and that’s all I’m going to say.”

NDP leader Tom Mulcair said Rathgeber’s frustration was part of a pattern of behaviour with the Harper government that incuded recent events in the Senate.

“That’s the reality of Ottawa. These are people who got themselves elected on a promise of transparency and accountability.

Rathgeber has argued his government’s suggestion of a high baseline salary to trigger public disclosure was too high and would only allow for information on salaries of some CEOs at Crown corporations, chairs of boards and commissions or a few judicial appointments, while excluding information on salaries of deputy ministers across government.

Time To Abolish The Senate?

For many years discussions have taken place across the country. From what does the senate actually contribute to Canada to can we actually live without it?

Being a common sense conservative I will be the first person to state that I believe the time has come to disband the senate and it's un-elected officials. Sure we could have elected officials in the senate but then stand the chance that we would have a house and senate controlled by polar opposites much like in the States and end up with nothing being accomplished in a political gridlock that can last a generation. I do like to have checks and balances but is there really a way to accomplish this without a properly elected senate? Maybe a senate that is elected with no party affiliation, but you would still know where people sit before every voting for them and hence the same problem that the U.S. faces year in and year out.

Our provinces seem to make out just fine without senates and I would argue that maybe without the extra step that is the senate, government seems to become more efficient at running itself. We the people elected our MP's and MLA's to speak for us and we hold them accountable every 4 years, if they are not doing what we like, well you know what happens... The senate on the other hand, un-elected and unaccounted for which makes it a disease in of itself in the Canadian Constitution, a disease that we have an easy cure for. But the cure has it's side affects...

In order to abolish the senate you need to open up the constitution to reforms and there in lies the problem. We have too many groups within our nation that will want more perks tossed in that will cost the rest of Canada. Don't think for a second that Quebec will not want more out of equalization than they currently get, or that maybe Saskatchewan can fight and finally get non-renewable resources pulled out of the equalization math(and rightfully so as is the case in other jurisdictions), or natives wanting more land, Ontario wanting more representation... Well soon you see where this is going, it is a can of worms that I think will be hard to close.

There are constitutional lawyers throughout the country working on this as we speak, some for governments some for self interest groups and all ready to pounce at any given moment. Can the senate be abolished without opening the constitution, that will play out in the courts of the land as we move forward, most are under the assumption that you cannot reform without opening the constitution so abolishment seems to be the only path that "may" be able to be taken. Kind of strange that reform would be harder to accomplish than abolishment but who am I to argue with the political scholars, lawyers and judges?

It costs the Canadian public well over $100 million to run the senate every year, does not sound like to much in the grand scheme of things but over time it adds up and because they are not held to account it is my belief that it is time for it to go.

ProGOPGear.com: Patriotic T-Shirts, Stickers, and more!

Labour(Union) Issues In Saskatchewan

With the review that currently is ongoing in Saskatchewan and the whole labour movement uproar, I thought I would re-post my common sense approach to the union problems in Saskatchewan. The Saskatchewan Federation of Labour, unions of course will hate this but it better represents the workers, saving families upwards of $4,000/year in union dues.


At any length this is my proposal in a nutshell;

I have suggested that the government bring in Right To Work Legislation. This would not be quite what they have in some States, it goes further to protect the worker than their legislations do. As part of this Right To Work Legislation each worker hired within a union environment will have the right to join union or not. The worker, if so wishing not to join the union, would then become part of a fund or pool that holds a labour relations firm on retainer for when their collective bargaining agreement is about to expire.

In the legislation, when the collective agreement is one year from expiring it would mandate that both sides get to the table. Your lawyers would sit down with the employer for up to 6 months to try to bring about an agreement fair to both sides. If no agreement is in place at the end of six months then a mediator would come in and try for 3 months to get a deal in place. After three months and still no agreement then a move to binding arbitration with an arbitrator brought in from outside the province and who is acceptable to both sides. A deal would be in place by the end of the contract and the he said/she said political games would be taken out of the equation. There would be no strike actions taken as contracts would be done before any labour agreement ends, which further brings down the whole ability to play political game by both labour and employer.

Now you may say how is that fair to workers? Well they get the same protection that they currently have under unions but without the huge expense and games unions play. Many union members are charged well over $1000/year(some over 2,000) in union dues with no choice on how the unions leadership spend the money. Under this particular Right To Work legislation you could cut those union dues from over $1000 to maybe less than $100/year. Imagine what this change would do for the families? Having an extra $1000 in your pocket each year is nothing to sniff at, you can use it for what ever you see fit.

With this approach, you would not have the hard feelings between employer and employees as you know the process will be the same each and every time your contract comes due. The lawyers and employer will work together to make sure any agreement is fair and will ensure the growth of the company or if government make government more streamlined and sustainable.

Unions of course would fight this tooth and nail saying that labour cannot be represented nearly as well by a firm and to this I would answer that lawyers are trained to negotiate, this is what they do when it comes to labour relations. They are more likely to come to an agreement without all the background noise that union leadership puts out before and during negotiations. If the union leadership is really looking out for their members then they should have no problem with them choosing this path and keeping $1000 in their pocket on a yearly basis? The worker can then choose how they spend their money, not like how it is today under the unions where there is no vote for advertising, political contributions or the like.

We have to look at the role unions play in today's society, are they really needed any longer? We have labour relations boards, workers compensation boards and more. These boards do what the unions claim they do for the average person in the workplace, so why have the redundancy? The unions have served their purpose in the past, but in order to build an economic powerhouse where labour and employer have the same goals, we must leave the unions in the past. It is a whole new world out there and we must be able to compete on a global scale and I feel this is a step in the right direction.

There is no doubt that unions hold back our ability to compete, they protect the weak workers, those with no work ethic and hold back the ones who are hard working and would ultimately rise to the top in any other system. With this Right To Work Legislation our economic output would see a tremendous increase because the best people will rise to the top thereby creating an environment where people know that they need to work in order to succeed and therefor production would increase dramatically.

Far too long union has held us back, it is 2012 and it's time for change, let's change our labour legislation to better protect the worker and create a society more in tune with the ever changing global economic landscape. But first things first, we must be willing to talk to friends and family about this, without that grassroots movement things don't change. If you agree with my thoughts do not be afraid to write your MLA, your MP, the Premier and even the Prime Minister, this is how change starts.

This plan of course would need a lot of legal polish but it is a framework that could take us through to the next century in my opinion. Why is it that labour and business must butt heads are we not more civilized than that?

An example of this approach is say CUPE....29,000 members, each of them paying at least $1000/year union dues. That is $29,000,000/year revenue for the big business....I mean union, taken over 4 years equals $116,000,000!!! This total is probably very conservative as I know many CUPE members pay much more than $1,000/year.


Now to have a law firm under retainer may cost ten grand or so, and then in the 3rd year of bargaining maybe costs of $300,000 more or less. Total four year commitment is $330,000.

SAVINGS is $115,670,000 All of this money back into the pockets of the working men and women. Money better spent by them, how they want and not by some union figure head playing political games! Common sense says that the workers would be farther ahead with the money in their pockets

Unions In My Sights!

Over the next couple of weeks I will be working on a plan that could bring about a large change to how the labour movement works in this country. Their feet will be held to the fire and let me tell you the details will be exciting. I will be forwarding this plan off to all levels of government and I hope with your support maybe change will come! Our country can and will become much more productive under this plan and allow for us to more evenly compete with the other economies of the world. Stay tuned!

With the global turmoil I think this is a very wise move by Canada.  The next 100 years belong to India, China, Russia and Brazil(BRIC)  The BRIC countries are leading the way economically and for Canada to take full advantage of their booming economies we must strengthen ties politically and economically.

Brazil-Canada move to strengthen commercial ties

 

 

BY MARK KENNEDY, POSTMEDIA NEWS AUGUST 8, 2011 2:18 PM

 

 

• STORY
• PHOTOS ( 1 )
• VIDEO ( 1 )

 

 

Prime Minister Stephen Harper attends a signing ceremony with Brazil's President Dilma Rousseff at Planalto Palace in Brasilia on August 8, 2011.

Photograph by: Ueslei Marcelino, Reuters

BRASILIA — A group of senior Canadian and Brazilian business leaders has been established to provide governments in both countries strategic advice on how to strengthen commercial ties.

The announcement was made Monday after a meeting of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff.

"We have both been successfully weathering the headwinds of the global economy due to strong fundamentals," Harper said in a prepared statement he delivered while Rousseff stood nearby. "And while we compete, we also understand that trade is a vital tool for our mutual goals of greater security, expanded wealth and more jobs."

Harper said he and Rousseff had "cordial, productive discussions on Brazil-Canada relations and global concerns."

He said that included in-depth discussions of the global economic and financial situation that is currently drawing concerns worldwide. He said they will work together as members of the G20 to "push forward global stability and the global economic recovery."

In her own statement Rousseff was critical of the report issued last Friday by Standard & Poor's which downgraded the United States credit rating from its traditional triple-A status. That move has caused jitters in stock markets around the world, leading to a sudden decline in stock values as the markets opened in New York on Monday morning.

Rousseff said she thought the Standard & Poor's report was rushed and was based on inaccurate information.

For his part, Harper made no immediate comment on the economic problems faced by the United States or the European Union, although he was expected to provide his own observations at a news conference later Monday afternoon.

Harper is in Brazil at the start of a week-long trip to Latin America to boost trade, promote democracy, and fight against the security threats posed by organized crime in the region.

His main priority in Brazil is to boost trade with the country which is already the seventh largest economy in the world and is viewed as a burgeoning economic player.

"Your remarkable emergence as a global economic power and your embrace of democratic freedoms after many years of autocratic rule are an inspiration to struggling peoples everywhere," Harper told Rousseff in his statement, delivered in front of journalists.

He promised that while this is his first visit to Brazil, it won't be his last — as he continues to push forward with a strategy to improve relations in Central and South America.

"Brazil, with all its vitality and its enterprising spirit, is a tremendously important part of our plans. We share the fundamental values of democracy, diversity and human rights. We both strive for peace and prosperity at home while accepting global responsibilities."

Harper and Rousseff announced the launch of the Canada-Brazil CEO Forum, which they said is designed to "strengthen the economic and commercial relationship" between their two countries.

"Our government recognizes Brazil as an important economic and strategic partner and is committed to opening up new opportunities for Canadians and their business," said Harper. "The creation of the CEO Forum will expand our commercial ties, create more jobs, and ensure our long-term prosperity."

According to a background paper provided by the Canadian government, the forum will bring together influential business leaders from both countries who will "provide input into the policymaking process of both governments."

Its members will meet "on the margins" of high-level political meetings between Canada and Brazil. The group will be co-chaired by "highly respected and forward-looking Canadians and Brazilian leaders who understand the imperative of working in a world connected by global commerce, opportunity and shared values," according to a Canadian statement.

Two co-chairs appointed by the governments will then be responsible for identifying other CEOs to participate in the forum, which will be tasked with providing "joint recommendations on strategic priorities" for how Canada and Brazil can strengthen their "international competitiveness."

Also Monday, Canada and Brazil signed a bilateral Air Transport Agreement to provide tourists and businesses more choice in airline services, destinations and lower prices, and inked a deal on social security which will bring benefits to Canadians and Brazilians by co-ordinating pension benefits between both countries.

As well, the two nations signed a memorandum of understanding that will involve Canada sharing its "recent experience" in hosting the 2010 Winter Olympics. Brazil will be hosting the summer Olympic games in 2016 and is seeking helping on how to organize the event.

mkennedy@postmedia.com

Read more:http://www.canada.com/business/Brazil+Canada+move+strengthen+commercial+ties/5222663/story.html#ixzz1UTFo5Zfc